US PTAB Patent Cases
8,574 decisions indexed
Page 230 of 286 · 8,574 total
Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. et al. v.Maxell, LTD.
The Board granted institution for IPR2025-01311, allowing the challenge to proceed to merits review after determining the petitioner met the required likelihood of success standard.
Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. et al. v.Maxell, Ltd.
The PTAB granted institution for IPR2025-01310 involving Samsung and Maxell. The Board found that the petitioner demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on at least one challenged claim.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Maxell, LTD.
The USPTO Board granted institution for IPR2025-01309 and related cases after determining the petitioner had a reasonable likelihood of prevailing. This moves the proceedings forward to trial phase.
Spotify AB et al. v.Tijerino, Manuel
Spotify USA Inc. successfully challenged 17 claims of the '9146925 patent based on obviousness (35 U.S.C. § 103). The PTAB preliminarily found that the combination of prior art references—Laut, Kincaid, and Bongiovi—renders the claimed digital jukebox system obvious to a Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art.
Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. et al. v.Maxell, LTD.
The PTAB granted institution for IPR2025-01308 involving Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. and Maxell, LTD., allowing the dispute over patent 11277650 to proceed to trial.
Samsung Electronic Co. Ltd. et al. v.Maxell, LTD.
The PTAB granted institution for IPR2025-01307 involving Samsung Electronic Co. Ltd. and Maxell, LTD., finding the petitioner had a reasonable likelihood of prevailing.
Cisco Systems, Inc. v.Dynamic Mesh Networks, Inc.
The PTAB denied institution of an IPR because the patent owner had filed a statutory disclaimer covering all challenged claims and the entire patent term.
Cisco Systems, Inc. v.Dynamic Mesh Networks, Inc.
The PTAB granted institution for IPR2025-01303 involving Cisco Systems and Dynamic Mesh Networks after reviewing the merits. This allows the proceeding to move forward to a full trial.
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Ltd. v.Advanced Integrated Circuit Process LLC
The PTAB granted institution for IPR2025-01302, allowing Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Ltd. to challenge the patent held by Advanced Integrated Circuit Process LLC.
Google LLC v.Advanced Coding Technologies LLC
The USPTO Director denied the institution of multiple Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceedings, meaning no trial will take place.
Google LLC v.Advanced Coding Technologies LLC
The USPTO Director denied institution for IPR2025-01277, meaning no trial will proceed on the challenged patent.
Niantic, Inc. v.ImagineAR, Inc. et al.
The PTAB denied institution of the IPR for patent 12070691 (ImagineAR), finding that Niantic failed to meet the required likelihood standard.
Niantic, Inc. v.ImagineAR, Inc. et al.
The PTAB denied the institution of IPR2025-01275, finding that Niantic failed to meet the non-discretionary standard required for proceeding.
Niantic, Inc. v.ImagineAR, Inc. et al.
The PTAB denied institution of IPR2025-01274 after finding the petitioner failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of prevailing or that the claims were more likely than not unpatentable.
Niantic, Inc. v.ImagineAR, Inc. et al.
The PTAB denied institution for IPR2025-01273 after a merits review, finding the petitioner failed to show a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on the challenged claims.
Generac Power Systems Inc. et al. v.Champion Power Equipment, Inc.
The PTAB granted institution for IPR2025-01271 after finding the petitioner showed a reasonable likelihood of prevailing. Other related proceedings were denied institutional review.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.XiFi Networks R&D, Inc.
Samsung successfully secured institution for its IPR against XiFi Networks' patent 12114177. The trial is currently stayed pending a Director Review of related decisions.
Fresenius Kabi SwissBiosim, GmbH et al. v.Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
The PTAB denied institution of the IPR in a dispute between Fresenius Kabi SwissBiosim and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, finding that the petitioner failed to meet the required likelihood standard.
BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd. v.Paneltouch Technologies LLC
The USPTO granted institution for IPR2025-01267 after determining the petitioner had a reasonable likelihood of prevailing. This decision confirms the proceeding will move forward to merits review.
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited v.Marlin Semiconductor Ltd. et al.
The PTAB granted institution for IPR2025-01265, allowing the trial to proceed after determining the petitioner had a reasonable likelihood of prevailing. This notice also details multiple other institutional decisions across various proceedings.
Imperative Care, Inc. v.Inari Medical, Inc. et al.
The USPTO granted institution for IPR2025-01264, allowing the challenged claims to proceed to trial based on a reasonable likelihood of prevailing.
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. et al. v.OMNI MEDSCI, INC.
The PTAB granted institution for the IPR challenge against patent 12268475 involving Samsung Electronics and Omni Medsci.
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. et al. v.OMNI MEDSCI, INC.
The USPTO granted institution for IPR2025-01253 after determining the petitioner had a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on at least one challenged claim.
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. et al. v.OMNI MEDSCI, INC.
The USPTO Board granted institution for IPR2025-01252, allowing the challenger to proceed with the review.
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. et al. v.OMNI MEDSCI, INC.
The PTAB granted institution for IPR2025-01251, allowing SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. to challenge OMNI MEDSCI, INC.'s patent 10874304.
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. et al. v.OMNI MEDSCI, INC.
The PTAB granted institution for the IPR challenge against patent 9651533 involving Samsung Electronics and Omni Medsci.
BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd. v.Paneltouch Technologies LLC
The USPTO Board issued mixed institution decisions across multiple IPR and PGR proceedings, granting trials in some cases while denying them in others based on likelihood of prevailing.
BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd. v.Paneltouch Technologies LLC
The USPTO Board granted institution for IPR2025-01245, allowing the trial to proceed on merits.
3D Systems Corporation et al. v.Intrepid Automation, Inc.
The USPTO granted institution for five IPR proceedings (IPR2025-01042, IPR2025-01241, IPR2025-01264, IPR2025-01153, and IPR2025-01242) after determining the petitioner had a reasonable likelihood of prevailing.
3D Systems Corporation et al. v.Intrepid Automation, Inc.
The USPTO granted institution for IPR2025-01241 and several other proceedings, allowing the merits phase of review to proceed.
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.