Russell E. Cass
106 IP cases indexed. Covers patent matters.
Cases Presided Over
106 cases indexed | Page 4 of 4
Nearmap US, Inc. v.Pictometry International Corp. et al.
The PTAB denied Nearmap US, Inc.'s IPR petition against Pictometry International Corp., finding the petitioner failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of success. The Board also noted that the Petition lacked particularity in mapping prior art disclosures to claim limitations.
Nearmap US, Inc. v.Eagle View Technologies, Inc. et al.
The PTAB denied institution of IPR for Nearmap US against Eagle View Technologies regarding a property database patent (10671648). The denial was based on the Petitioner's failure to provide a detailed, non-bare-quotation explanation linking prior art disclosures to the challenged claims.
Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company et al. v.Cobblestone Wireless LLC
HPE and Cisco settled their IPR with Cobblestone Wireless over U.S. Patent 7,924,802, leading the PTAB to terminate the proceeding and keep the settlement confidential.
Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company et al. v.Cobblestone Wireless LLC
The PTAB institution decision upheld the Petitioner's challenge of nine claims based on obviousness in wireless communication technology. The Board accepted that prior art disclosures, including IEEE standards and Shearer, support the claimed dual-frequency transmission structure.
Samsung Electronics America, Inc. et al. v.Cobblestone Wireless LLC
Samsung Electronics and Cobblestone Wireless settled their inter partes review of U.S. Patent 7,924,802, leading the PTAB to terminate the proceeding. The Board granted the joint motion to terminate and treated the settlement agreement as confidential.
Samsung Electronics America, Inc. et al. v.Cobblestone Wireless LLC
The PTAB institution decision found a reasonable likelihood of success for Samsung Electronics America, Inc. in challenging Cobblestone Wireless LLC's patent (7924802). The Board preliminarily determined that the preamble 'in a wireless communication channel' is not limiting, allowing the IPR to proceed on grounds of obviousness (103) and anticipation (102).
Cisco Systems, Inc. v.Lionra Technologies Limited
The PTAB found claims unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) based on a combination of prior art references (Gai, Yip, Kwan, and Georgiou). The Board determined that an ordinary skilled artisan would have been motivated to combine these teachings to enhance network security and implement advanced ACL functions.
Visa, Inc. v.Cortex MCP, Inc.
Visa, Inc. successfully convinced the PTAB to institute an IPR against Cortex MCP, Inc.'s patent (11329973) covering digital identity and credential management. The Board adopted key constructions for 'OVER file' and 'verified by an issuing agency,' clearing the path for a full trial on obviousness grounds.
Visa, Inc. v.Cortex MCP, Inc.
Visa, Inc. successfully secured institution of its IPR against Cortex MCP, Inc.'s patent (10749859), despite the Patent Owner's objections regarding claim construction. The Board adopted a broad interpretation of 'OVER file,' encompassing both images and tokens, allowing the obviousness challenge to proceed to trial.
Visa, Inc. v.Cortex MCP, Inc.
The PTAB found numerous claims of U.S. Patent No. 11329973 unpatentable based on obviousness (103). The Board determined that the prior art, particularly Oborne, discloses key limitations related to token generation and issuing agency verification in digital credential systems. Claims 1, 3–8, and 10–16 were found invalid, while claims 2, 9, and 17 survived.
Visa, Inc. v.Cortex MCP, Inc.
The PTAB found most claims of the '859 patent unpatentable based on obviousness (103). The Board adopted Petitioner's view regarding the level of ordinary skill in the art and construed key terms like 'OVER file.' Claims 2, 10, 19, and 21 survived the challenge.
Visa, Inc. v.Cortex MCP, Inc.
The PTAB Board upheld the validity of Cortex MCP's claims (1-17) related to electronic credentials and tokenization. The Board rejected arguments that the claimed features were obvious over prior art references like Oborne, Neafsey, and Stafford.
Visa, Inc. v.Cortex MCP, Inc.
Visa, Inc.'s IPR petition against Cortex MCP, Inc.'s patent was instituted by the PTAB, allowing the case to proceed to trial. The Board adopted key claim constructions, including defining 'OVER file' to encompass tokens and NFC interactions for 'scan,' confirming sufficient basis for unpatentability arguments.
Visa, Inc. v.Cortex MCP, Inc.
Visa, Inc., successfully petitioned for institution in a high-stakes IPR against Cortex MCP, Inc.'s digital credentialing patent (9251531). The Board adopted key claim constructions favorable to the Petitioner and found sufficient evidence of obviousness based on prior art references.
Visa, Inc. v.Cortex MCP, Inc.
The Board found that the majority of claims (24 out of 33) were unpatentable over various combinations of prior art references. The key finding was that Oborne teaches core tokenization elements, while other combinations failed to provide sufficient motivation for the claimed improvements.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Headwater Research LLC
The Board found all challenged claims of patent 8406733 unpatentable over prior art references TS-23.140 and Ogawa by a preponderance of the evidence. The decision hinged on demonstrating that conventional design choices, such as using SSL/TLS and implementing modems, would have been obvious to one skilled in the art.
Facing a similar IP matter?
Arctic Invent is a specialist IP firm with deep litigation expertise across India, EU, US, and UK. Our team uses data-driven strategy to build stronger cases.