Judge Profile

THU A. Dang

104 IP cases indexed. Covers patent matters.

Cases Presided Over

104 cases indexed | Page 4 of 4

patent all challenged claims unpatentable

Meta Platforms, Inc. v.SitNet, LLC

· IPR2026-00111

Meta Platforms successfully challenged SitNet’s ’682 patent covering situational networks. The PTAB found all 20 claims unpatentable as obvious over prior art references Burfeind and Crowley. The patent owner did not respond, leaving the petitioner’s arguments unopposed.

patent all challenged claims unpatentable

Meta Platforms, Inc. v.SitNet, LLC

· IPR2026-00113

Meta Platforms successfully challenged SitNet’s ’682 patent, leading the PTAB to find all 20 claims unpatentable as obvious over prior‑art event‑organization and location‑based systems.

patent all challenged claims unpatentable

Meta Platforms, Inc. v.SitNet, LLC

· IPR2026-00110

Meta Platforms successfully challenged SitNet’s ’682 patent in an IPR, resulting in all 20 claims being found unpatentable for obviousness over Burfeind and Crowley. The patent owner did not respond, leaving the petition unopposed.

patent denied

Microsoft Corporation v.Proxense, LLC

· IPR2024-01327

The PTAB denied Microsoft's request to institute Inter Partes Review (IPR) against Proxense's patent 8,886,954. The denial was based on a procedural condition that required prior non-institution in a related proceeding.

patent denied

Apple Inc. v.Proxense, LLC

· IPR2024-01485

The PTAB denied Apple Inc.'s request to institute an IPR against Proxense's patent 8,886,954, finding that the petition did not warrant institution as a second challenge.

patent denied

Apple Inc. v.Proxense, LLC

· IPR2024-01486

The PTAB denied Apple Inc.'s request to institute an IPR against Proxense's patent 8352730. The Board found that Apple failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of success, particularly concerning the justification for filing multiple petitions.

patent denied

Apple Inc. v.Proxense, LLC

· IPR2025-00074

The PTAB denied Apple's IPR against Proxense because a related review of the same patent had already been instituted in another proceeding.

patent instituted

OnePlus Technology (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd. et al. v.Pantech Corporation

· IPR2025-00756

The PTAB issued an institution decision in the OnePlus vs. Pantech IPR, finding reasonable likelihood that certain claims are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The Board's analysis hinged on detailed claim construction and the obviousness arguments presented against various 3GPP specifications and industry standards like Ericsson.

patent mixed - some claims cancelled, some upheld

Aylo Freesites Ltd et al. v.DISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.

· IPR2024-00940

The PTAB held that 17 of the 25 challenged claims of DISH’s ’680 adaptive‑bitrate streaming patent were obvious over Ogdon and Allen, while 8 claims remained patentable.

patent mixed - some claims cancelled, some upheld

fuboTV Media Inc. v.DISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.

· IPR2024-00901

The PTAB denied fuboTV's request for rehearing of its IPR decision on patent 11,677,798. The Board held that the petitioner failed to show any misapprehension of prior‑art mappings or erroneous claim construction, leaving the earlier mixed result unchanged.

patent denied

fuboTV Media Inc. v.DISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.

· IPR2024-00904

The PTAB denied fuboTV Media’s request for rehearing of the final written decision in IPR2024-00046, finding no error in the Board’s claim construction or consideration of prior art. The petition’s arguments on claim 7 were deemed untimely and unsupported.

patent denied

BOE Technology Group Co., LTD v.Optronic Sciences LLC

· IPR2024-01134

The PTAB denied Optronic Sciences’ request to revisit the institution of six inter partes reviews filed by BOE Technology Group. The Board found no extraordinary circumstances and held that the deadline for additional briefing had passed.

patent denied

BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd. v.Optronic Sciences LLC

· IPR2024-01131

The PTAB denied Optronic Sciences’ request to revisit the institution of its IPR against BOE Technology Group, finding no extraordinary circumstances and that the new Director’s guidance did not apply.

patent instituted

Webgroup Czech Republic, a.s. et al. v.DISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.

· IPR2025-00348

The PTAB instituted an inter partes review of DISH Technologies' adaptive streaming patent and granted joinder of Czech challenger Webgroup and NKL Associates, linking the case to a prior IPR over the same claims.

Arctic Invent — IP Strategy

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.

Consult our team →