US PTAB Patent Cases
8,574 decisions indexed
Page 238 of 286 · 8,574 total
Activision Blizzard, Inc. v.Milestone Entertainment, LLC
Activision Blizzard successfully petitioned the PTAB to institute an IPR against Milestone Entertainment's patent (11335164) covering electronic game systems and prizing. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on multiple grounds, primarily based on obviousness over prior art references like Kelly.
Activision Blizzard, Inc. v.Milestone Entertainment, LLC
The PTAB granted institution of IPR for Activision Blizzard against Milestone Entertainment regarding a gaming patent. The dispute centers on whether the patented virtual currency system is obvious over prior art related to pay-per-use game credits.
Activision Blizzard, Inc. v.Milestone Entertainment, LLC
The PTAB granted institution for Activision Blizzard's IPR against Milestone Entertainment regarding a gaming patent. The challenger successfully demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on obviousness grounds over prior art related to virtual currency and in-game economies.
Activision Blizzard, Inc. v.Milestone Entertainment, LLC
Activision Blizzard successfully petitioned the PTAB to challenge Milestone Entertainment's patent on grounds of obviousness over prior art references, leading to institution of the IPR. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of prevailing regarding claims 1 and others based on combinations of Kelly, Walker, and Schneier.
AROMA 360, LLC v.Air Esscentials, Inc.
AROMA 360 successfully petitioned the PTAB against Air Esscentials' patent (10092918) regarding aerosol/fluid dispersion technology. The Board instituted the IPR, finding a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on obviousness grounds over Goubet and Gao-2 prior art references.
AROMA 360, LLC v.Air Esscentials, Inc.
AROMA 360, LLC successfully petitioned to challenge claims of Air Esscentials, Inc.'s patent (10583449) before the PTAB. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on multiple grounds, leading to institution of the IPR.
AROMA 360, LLC v.Air Esscentials, Inc.
AROMA 360, LLC successfully petitioned the PTAB to institute IPR against Air Esscentials, Inc.'s patent (9527094) for obviousness. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of prevailing regarding claim 7 based on Sevy, leading to trial institution.
Meta Platforms, Inc. v.Mullen Industries LLC
Meta Platforms successfully petitioned to challenge Mullen Industries' patent in an IPR proceeding concerning location-based gaming technology. The PTAB found a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on at least one challenged claim, leading to the institution of the review.
Meta Platforms, Inc. v.Mullen Industries LLC
Meta Platforms successfully secured the institution of IPR against Mullen Industries' patent 10967270, challenging five claims based on obviousness over Nakamura and Benini.
Western Digital Technologies et al. v.Godo Kaisha IP Bridge 1
Western Digital Technologies, Inc.'s IPR petition against patent number 10367138 was denied by the PTAB. The Board found that Petitioner failed to establish a reasonable likelihood of success on the merits under Section 103 grounds.
Apple Inc. v.Ziklag IP LLC
Apple Inc. successfully requested institution of an IPR against Ziklag IP LLC's patent, asserting that claims are obvious over prior art references Yurt and Logan. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of unpatentability under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
SAVANT TECHNOLOGIES LLC d/b/a GE LIGHTING et al. v.Feit Electric Company, Inc.
SAVANT TECHNOLOGIES LLC d/b/a GE LIGHTING successfully petitioned to institute an IPR against Feit Electric Company, Inc., challenging 14 claims of patent 8614539. The Board found a reasonable likelihood that the claimed LED device components are unpatentable over prior art combinations.
PacifiCorp et al. v.MES, Inc.
The PTAB denied institution of an IPR petition challenging a mercury removal patent (10933370) because the petitioner had filed a second, ranked petition on the same claims. The Board followed the Director's instruction to select only one petition.
PacifiCorp et al. v.MES, Inc.
The PTAB decided to institute the IPR petition against Birchtech Corp.'s '370 patent, finding that PacifiCorp et al. met the standard for reasonable likelihood of prevailing on all asserted grounds. The Board also addressed and rejected arguments from Patent Owner regarding written description and enablement issues concerning bromide compounds.
PacifiCorp et al. v.MES, Inc.
The Director granted review of institution decisions in IPRs involving PacifiCorp and Birchtech, vacating the initial rulings. The Board was remanded to determine which single petition should be instituted for each patent due to concerns over procedural efficiency.
PacifiCorp et al. v.MES, Inc.
The PTAB instituted IPR on PacifiCorp's claims against Birchtech Corp. regarding flue gas desulfurization technology, overcoming a time-bar defense raised by the Patent Owner. The Board found Petitioner met the reasonable likelihood standard for institution across multiple grounds of anticipation and obviousness.
PacifiCorp et al. v.MES, Inc.
PacifiCorp and co-petitioners successfully challenged the '370 patent, demonstrating a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on multiple grounds of obviousness (103). The Board found that combinations of prior art references like Vosteen589/Starns or Downs-Boiler/Mass-EPA rendered key claims obvious.
PacifiCorp et al. v.MES, Inc.
The Director granted review of institution decisions in multiple IPRs involving PacifiCorp and Birchtech Corp., vacating the initial rulings and remanding the cases to the Board for a single, efficient path forward.
CSPC Megalith Biopharmaceutical Co., Ltd. et al. v.Shanghai Miracogen Inc. et al.
CSPC Megalith Biopharmaceutical Co., Ltd. successfully argued obviousness over Wei, Liu, and Leanna in an IPR proceeding against Shanghai Miracogen Inc. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of success on multiple claims, leading to the institution of the case for trial.
GetTattle, Inc. v.AfterWords, Inc.
GetTattle, Inc. successfully petitioned to institute IPR against AfterWords, Inc.'s patent (10430811) based on anticipation grounds (§ 102). The Board found sufficient support in prior art references Douglas and Ganesh for all challenged claims, leading to the institution of the case.
Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.SoundClear Technologies LLC et al.
Amazon successfully convinced the PTAB to institute trial on all seven challenged claims of SoundClear Technologies' patent. The Board found a reasonable likelihood that Amazon would prevail on its obviousness arguments over various combinations of prior art references, including Shin and Aoyama.
TankLogix, LLC v.SitePro, Inc.
The PTAB denied institution of TankLogix's IPR against SitePro, Inc. regarding claims related to remote control of fluid-handling devices in oil and gas facilities. The Board found that the petitioner failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on grounds of anticipation or obviousness over prior art references Cardamone and Kahn.
TankLogix, LLC v.SitePro, Inc.
TankLogix's IPR petition against SitePro's patent (11,294,403 B2) was denied by the PTAB. The Board found that prior art reference Kahn did not disclose the necessary 'remote control' capabilities for fluid-handling devices, defeating both anticipation and obviousness grounds.
TankLogix, LLC v.SitePro, Inc.
The PTAB denied institution of the IPR for TankLogix against SitePro regarding remote fluid control systems. The Board found that Petitioner failed to establish a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on any ground, specifically rejecting attempts to equate 'process data' with the claimed 'target value.'
Anthony Inc. v.ControlTec, LLC
Anthony Inc. successfully moved forward in its IPR against ControlTec, LLC's patent (7421847), leading to institution on all 20 challenged claims. The Board found sufficient evidence of obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103, specifically finding the prior art reference 'Carter' analogous to condensation control in refrigerated cases.
TankLogix, LLC v.SitePro, Inc.
TankLogix, LLC's IPR petition against SitePro, Inc.'s patent was denied by the PTAB, finding insufficient evidence to support anticipation or obviousness challenges. The Board determined that TankLogix failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on the record regarding claims related to fluid handling and industrial control systems.
Revvo Technologies, Inc. v.Cerebrum Sensor Technologies, Inc.
The Director denied institution of an IPR against Cerebrum Sensor Technologies' patent, ruling that Revvo Technologies failed to adequately explain its differing claim construction positions between the PTAB and district court litigation.
Revvo Technologies, Inc. v.Cerebrum Sensor Technologies, Inc.
The PTAB granted institution of the IPR for Revvo Technologies against Cerebrum Sensor Technologies, allowing claims to be challenged on obviousness grounds after a remand. The Board ruled that Petitioner provided sufficient justification for differing claim construction positions.
Revvo Technologies, Inc. v.Cerebrum Sensor Technologies, Inc.
The Director vacated the institution decision in a patent dispute involving Revvo and Cerebrum, remanding the case for further proceedings after clarifying that petitioners must explain inconsistent claim construction positions across forums.
Revvo Technologies, Inc. v.Cerebrum Sensor Technologies, Inc.
The PTAB granted institution of IPR for Revvo Technologies against Cerebrum Sensor Technologies, challenging 26 claims related to sensor assemblies. The Board found a reasonable likelihood that the prior art renders the claims obvious.
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.