US PTAB Patent Cases
5,620 decisions indexed
Page 184 of 188 · 5,620 total
MICROSOFT CORPORATION et al. v.LiTL LLC
Microsoft and other petitioners seek Director review of a PTAB denial to institute an IPR on U.S. Patent 9,880,715, alleging the Board misapplied obviousness standards and treated the case inconsistently with a related granted IPR.
Motorola Solutions, Inc. v.STA Group, LLC
Motorola Solutions and STA Group settled their IPR dispute over Patent 9,319,852, leading to a joint motion that terminated the proceeding. The Board granted the motion and ordered the settlement agreements to be kept confidential.
Bruker Spatial Biology, Inc. v.10x Genomics, Inc. et al.
Bruker Spatial Biology, Inc. and 10x Genomics jointly asked the PTAB to file their settlement agreement as business‑confidential information and keep it separate from the patent file. The request invokes 35 U.S.C. § 317 and related regulations to protect the settlement details.
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.
Aylo Freesites Ltd et al. v.DISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.
The USPTO Director denied Aylo Freesites’ request for a review of the institution decisions in multiple IPRs, including the case involving DISH Technologies’ patent 10,469,554. The denial leaves the original institution outcomes in place.
Aylo Freesites Ltd et al. v.DISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.
Aylo Freesites filed Director Review requests challenging the PTAB’s discretionary denial of institution for eight IPRs against DISH Technologies. The petitioner alleges the Board misapplied General Plastic factors and erred on material facts. The review seeks reversal of the denial.
Aylo Freesites Ltd et al. v.DISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.
Aylo Freesites seeks Director Review of the PTAB’s denial to institute an IPR against DISH Technologies’ multi-bitrate streaming patent, arguing the Board misapplied General Plastic factors and ignored the merits of its petition. The petition relies on the strong prior art reference WO 02/49343 A1 (“Leaning”).
Motorola Solutions, Inc. v.STA Group, LLC
Motorola Solutions and STA Group have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 9,319,852 and jointly moved to terminate the pending inter partes review. The Board is asked to end the proceeding under 35 U.S.C. §317(a).
Bruker Spatial Biology, Inc. v.10x Genomics, Inc. et al.
Nanostring Technologies challenges U.S. Patent No. 11,542,554 in a PTAB Petition, arguing that numerous claims are obvious over combinations of prior art references like Zhuang, Cai, and Shen. The petitioner asserts the core technology for 3D positional information in nucleic acid imaging was already well-known in biological imaging.
Reolink Innovation Inc. et al. v.Throughtek Co., Ltd.
Reolink Innovation Inc. successfully petitioned the PTAB to challenge U.S. Patent No. 847842 on grounds of obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The petition presented multiple combinations of prior art, including Lorex Guide/Kim and Throughtek-2012/Lorex Video, arguing the claimed P2P connection methods were predictable.
Valve Corporation v.Immersion Corporation
The PTAB has instituted IPR proceedings against Immersion Corporation's patent, finding that the claims are anticipated or obvious over prior art references Rosenberg and Brock. The Board accepted the petitioner's arguments regarding how these older systems disclose modulated haptic effects based on extra-sensory input. This decision sets the stage for a detailed examination of the technical scope of haptic feedback in handheld devices.
Motorola Solutions, Inc. v.STA Group, LLC
Motorola Solutions challenged STA Group's patent (US 9319852) in an IPR, arguing that the claims are obvious over prior art references like Choksi and Shaffer1. The petitioner asserts that a Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art would have been motivated to combine elements from the cited prior art to achieve the claimed interoperability functionality. This initial petition sets up a detailed technical dispute regarding dynamic proxy insertion and device adherence determination.
Bruker Spatial Biology, Inc. v.10x Genomics, Inc. et al.
Bruker Spatial Biology successfully petitioned the PTAB to institute an IPR against 10x Genomics, Inc., challenging numerous claims of patent 11542554. The Board found a reasonable likelihood that the challenged claims are unpatentable based on grounds of obviousness (35 U.S.C. § 103).
Aylo Freesites Ltd et al. v.DISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.
The PTAB denied the IPR petition filed by Aylo Freesites Ltd against DISH Technologies L.L.C., citing a failure to demonstrate reasonable diligence in its prior art search and unfavorable General Plastic factors. The Board found that the Petitioner could not have reasonably avoided finding highly relevant references, leading to the denial of institution for all 16 claims at issue.
Aylo Freesites Ltd et al. v.DISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.
The PTAB denied institution of an IPR petition filed by Aylo Freesites Ltd against DISH Technologies L.L.C., citing failure to demonstrate reasonable diligence in prior art search and tactical delays. The Board relied on General Plastic factors, finding the overlap between petitions was significant and Petitioner failed to justify its timing or discovery efforts regarding new references.
Reolink Innovation Inc. et al. v.Throughtek Co., Ltd.
The PTAB institution decision found sufficient evidence of obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103 for multiple claims related to peer-to-peer connection establishment. The Petitioner successfully demonstrated that combining prior art references, such as the Lorex Guide and Kim, taught all limitations of several claimed features. This outcome significantly advances the challenge against the patent's validity in this technology area.
Valve Corporation v.Immersion Corporation
Valve Corporation successfully petitioned to institute IPR against Immersion Corporation's patent (9,116,546), asserting that the haptic feedback claims are anticipated or obvious in view of prior art. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of success on Claim 1 based on Rosenberg.
Motorola Solutions, Inc. v.STA Group, LLC
The PTAB denied Motorola Solutions' IPR against STA Group, finding the petitioner failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on its obviousness challenges over prior art Choksi.
MICROSOFT CORPORATION et al. v.LiTL LLC
The PTAB denied institution of the IPR, finding that the Petitioner failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of success in proving unpatentability. The claims related to graphical user interfaces (GUI) were challenged under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
MICROSOFT CORPORATION et al. v.LiTL LLC
The PTAB denied the petition challenging patent 9003315, finding that petitioners failed to demonstrate obviousness against the claims. The Board sided with the Patent Owner (LiTL LLC), concluding that prior art combinations did not teach the specific content filtering required by the patent.
Apple Inc. v.Carbyne Biometrics, LLC
The PTAB granted institution for Apple Inc.'s IPR challenge against Carbyne Biometrics, LLC's biometric fraud detection patent. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of unpatentability based on obviousness over combinations of prior art references like Stone and Hoyos. This decision sets the stage for a trial focusing on how existing financial security methods could be combined to achieve the claimed results.
Valve Corporation v.Immersion Corporation
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding all challenged claims of U.S. Patent No. 9,116,546 unpatentable. The decision relied on the Petitioner's uncontested arguments that prior art references (Rosenberg and Brock) anticipated or rendered obvious the patent claims.
Cisco Systems Inc. v.Portsmouth Network Corporation
The PTAB found that a large group of claims (15) were unpatentable over the prior art reference Gai under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). The Board relied on Petitioner's '1B' theory, which successfully demonstrated obviousness by showing Gai disclosed all limitations of the claimed network topology and dummy traffic function. Claims 11, 12, 23, and 24 survived the challenge.
Apple Inc. v.Carbyne Biometrics, LLC
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding that claims 1–12, 14–18, and 20–23 of the '886 patent are unpatentable. The Board concluded that the claimed fraud detection methods were obvious over combinations of prior art references including Stone, Hoyos, and Varghese.
Apple Inc. v.Carbyne Biometrics, LLC
The PTAB found all challenged claims unpatentable based on obviousness over the combination of prior art references Stone and Hoyos. The Board specifically agreed with Petitioner Apple Inc.'s arguments that an ordinary artisan would have been motivated to combine these systems for improved fraud resistance in electronic transactions.
Apple Inc. v.Carbyne Biometrics, LLC
The PTAB found all challenged claims unpatentable by a preponderance of the evidence. Petitioner successfully argued obviousness over combinations of Stone, Hoyos, and Varghese across various claim sets. The Board agreed that an ordinary skilled artisan would have been motivated to combine these prior art references for fraud detection purposes.
Dell Technologies Inc. et al. v.LiTL LLC
The PTAB denied Dell, HP, and Asus’s request for rehearing of its earlier decision not to institute an IPR on patent 9,563,229. The Board concluded the petitioners failed to show a reasonable likelihood of success, particularly regarding the accelerometer claim limitations.
CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. v.UMBRA TECHNOLOGIES LTD.
The USPTO Director denied Cisco's request for a Director Review of the institution decision in IPR2024-00498, leaving the original denial in place.
CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. v.UMBRA TECHNOLOGIES LTD.
Cisco has filed a Request for Director Review seeking to overturn the PTAB’s denial of institution of an IPR on its cloud firewall patent. The petition argues the Board erred on both the combination rationale and a typographical claim‑mapping error.
CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. v.UMBRA TECHNOLOGIES LTD.
Cisco seeks Director Review of a PTAB decision that found Umbra's data‑beacon networking claims obvious. Umbra contends the Board misinterpreted the claim preamble and ignored key evidence, urging reversal of the unpatentability finding.
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.