US PTAB Patent Cases
8,574 decisions indexed
Page 130 of 286 · 8,574 total
Jeisys Medical Inc. et al. v.Serendia, LLC
Serendia requests Director Review to terminate IPR2024-00384, arguing the Board improperly expedited institution of time‑barred petitions despite a pending ITC validity finding. The petition cites the rescinded Fintiv memo and extraordinary circumstances to seek dismissal.
Bruker Spatial Biology, Inc. v.10x Genomics, Inc. et al.
Bruker Spatial Biology and 10x Genomics have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 11,542,554, filing a joint motion to terminate the pending IPR. The Board has not issued a final decision, and the parties seek to keep the settlement confidential.
ADC Solutions Auto LLC et al. v.The Noco Company
The PTAB Director Review email authorizes ADC Solutions Auto LLC to file a 15‑page response to the Patent Owner’s Director Review request in IPR2024‑00671. No new evidence may be submitted and the response must be filed within five business days.
Jeisys Medical Inc. et al. v.Serendia, LLC
Jeisys Medical and Serendia have settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 9,320,536 and jointly moved to terminate the proceeding under 35 U.S.C. §317.
DISH Network L.L.C. et al. v.Entropic Communications, LLC
The USPTO denied DISH Network's request for Director Review of the decision that had previously denied institution of its IPR against Entropic Communications' video‑compression patent.
Jeisys Medical Inc. et al. v.Serendia, LLC
EndyMed Medical and Serendia settled their inter partes review disputes over U.S. Patent 9,775,774, leading the PTAB to terminate the proceedings and keep the settlement confidential.
Dexcom, Inc. v.Abbott Diabetes Care Inc.
Dexcom and Abbott filed a joint request with the PTAB to keep their IPR settlement agreement confidential, invoking statutory provisions for business‑confidential treatment.
Samsung Austin Semiconductor, LLC et al. v.Sung, Chien-Min
The PTAB sent an email directing Samsung Austin Semiconductor to file a limited 15‑page response to a Director Review request for IPR2024‑00534 and IPR2024‑00535, prohibiting new evidence and additional briefings.
Nichia Corporation v.BX LED LLC
Nichia Corp. and BX LED LLC settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 8,567,988 B2, leading the PTAB to terminate the IPR before institution. The settlement agreement was ordered kept confidential.
Mito Red Light, Inc. v.Joovv, Inc.
Mito Red Light and Joovv jointly request that their settlement agreement be treated as Confidential Business Information in the IPR.
Arm Limited v.ICPillar LLC
The USPTO denied Arm Limited's request for Director Review of the institution decision in IPR2024-00566 concerning patent 9,367,657. The original institution decision remains in effect.
SAP America, Inc. v.ISIX IP LLC
SAP America and ISIX IP settled their dispute over a 1999 ERP‑related patent and jointly moved to terminate the inter partes review. The Board has not yet decided any merits, allowing termination under 35 U.S.C. § 317(a).
Samsung Austin Semiconductor, LLC et al. v.Sung, Chien-Min
The USPTO Director denied Samsung’s request for a review of the Final Written Decision in IPR2024‑00534 concerning patent 9,138,862. The order affirms the earlier IPR outcome and provides no further relief.
Nintendo Co., Ltd. et al. v.American GNC Corporation
The PTAB denied Nintendo’s petitions for Director Review of the final written decisions in two IPRs against American GNC’s patents, leaving the original rulings unchanged.
Dexcom, Inc. v.Abbott Diabetes Care Inc.
Dexcom and Abbott Diabetes Care settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 11,298,056 covering continuous glucose monitoring technology. The parties filed a joint motion to terminate, and the Board granted termination without a final written decision.
Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy
Amazon and Nokia have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 11,805,267 and jointly moved to terminate the inter partes review. The motion cites statutory authority and public‑policy benefits of settlement.
Databricks, Inc. v.R2 Solutions LLC
The PTAB denied Databricks' request for Director Review of the earlier decision that refused to institute its IPR against R2 Solutions' data‑processing patent. The Director recused herself, and the Deputy Under Secretary upheld the denial.
US Conec Ltd. v.Senko Advanced Components, Inc.
Senko Advanced Components files a preliminary response urging the PTAB to deny US Conec’s IPR petition on claims covering a duplex fiber‑optic connector, arguing the cited prior art fails to meet every claim limitation.
Jeisys Medical Inc. et al. v.Serendia, LLC
Ilooda and Serendia have settled their dispute over a dermatology‑device patent and jointly moved to terminate Ilooda’s participation in the pending IPR, requesting the settlement remain confidential.
Jeisys Medical Inc. et al. v.Serendia, LLC
Serendia requests the USPTO Director to vacate the institution of an IPR against its dermatology device patent after the ITC upheld the patent’s validity, arguing the Board abused discretion and that the Fintiv factors favor denial.
Microchip Technology, Inc. v.Aptiv Technologies AG et al.
Aptiv Technologies withdrew its request for Director Review in the IPR against Microchip Technology, with Microchip not opposing. The withdrawal is made without prejudice to appeal the Final Written Decision.
CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. v.UMBRA TECHNOLOGIES LTD.
The USPTO denied Cisco Systems' request for Director Review of the institution decision in the IPR against Umbra Technologies' patent 10,630,505. The denial leaves the institution decision intact.
Milwaukee Electric Tool Corporation v.Klein Tools, Inc.
Milwaukee Electric Tool Corp. petitions the PTAB to invalidate Klein Tools' luminescent fish tape patent, asserting obviousness, lack of written description, and indefiniteness across all 18 claims.
Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.Nokia Technologies Oy
Amazon and Nokia have settled their IPR dispute over Patent 10,536,714 and jointly seek to keep the settlement agreement confidential while terminating the proceeding.
Juniper Networks, Inc v.Monarch Networking Solutions LLC
Monarch’s infringement suit against Cisco over Patent 8,451,845 was resolved by a joint stipulation of dismissal with prejudice, ending the dispute before the PTAB could institute an IPR.
Aylo Freesites Ltd et al. v.DISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.
Aylo Freesites Ltd seeks Director Review after the PTAB denied institution of its IPR against DISH Technologies' adaptive‑rate streaming patent, arguing the Board misapplied General Plastic factors and ignored the merits of the Leaning prior art.
Comcast Corporation et al. v.Entropic Communications LLC
Comcast's request for a Director Review of the PTAB's denial to institute its IPR against Entropic Communications was denied, leaving the original denial intact.
Aylo Freesites Ltd et al. v.DISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.
Aylo Freesites Ltd has petitioned the PTAB Director to review the Board’s denial of institution in IPR2024‑00519, arguing the Board misapplied General Plastic factors and Fintiv considerations.
JACS Solutions, Inc. v.Global Tel*Link Corporation d/b/a ViaPath Technologies
JACS Solutions and Global Tel*Link settled their IPR dispute before the Board could institute a trial. The Board granted the joint motion to terminate and kept the settlement confidential.
Aylo Freesites Ltd et al. v.DISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.
Aylo Freesites filed a Director Review request challenging the PTAB's denial of institution for IPR2024-00518, arguing the Board misapplied General Plastic factors and ignored merits. The Board had denied institution under discretionary grounds.
Dealing with a patent challenge?
Whether it's a Section 3(d) rejection, a post-grant opposition, or a FRAND dispute, Arctic's patent litigation team has handled it. Get a strategy call.