US PTAB Patent Cases
8,722 decisions indexed
Page 53 of 291 · 8,722 total
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Netlist, Inc.
Samsung and its affiliates successfully challenged all 20 claims of Netlist’s ’506 memory‑module patent in an IPR, with the Board finding the claims obvious over multiple prior‑art references.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Netlist, Inc.
Samsung and Micron successfully challenged Netlist’s U.S. Patent 11,093,417, leading the PTAB to find all fifteen claims unpatentable based on obviousness over the Perego disclosure and JEDEC DDR2 standards.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Netlist, Inc.
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding all of Samsung’s asserted claims of Netlist’s ’833 patent unpatentable as obvious over the Best, Bonella, and Mills references.
Disney Entertainment & Sports LLC v.Adeia Technologies Inc.
Disney filed an unopposed motion to dismiss its inter partes review of Adeia’s U.S. Patent 9,235,428 before the Board institutes the case, arguing that the proceeding is at an early stage and dismissal would save resources.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Netlist, Inc.
The PTAB initiated a sua sponte Director Review of an IPR involving Sinclair Pharma and others versus Hydrafacial, staying the proceeding after the ITC affirmed the claims’ validity and commercial success.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Netlist, Inc.
The USPTO denied Samsung's request for Director Review of PTAB decisions in two IPRs against Netlist, leaving the Board's rulings final.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Netlist, Inc.
The USPTO denied Samsung and Micron's request for Director Review of two Netlist IPR decisions, leaving the PTAB's final written decisions intact.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Netlist, Inc.
In IPR2026‑00018 the PTAB held that Samsung and its Micron co‑petitioners proved all 34 claims of Netlist’s ’060 memory‑package patent obvious over a combination of Kim, Rajan, Riho and Wyman. The Board adopted the district‑court claim constructions and rejected Netlist’s arguments about non‑DRAM limitations and collision risks.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Netlist, Inc.
The USPTO denied Samsung and Micron's request for Director Review of PTAB decisions in two Netlist IPRs, leaving the Board's rulings final.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Netlist, Inc.
The PTAB held that Samsung and its co‑petitioners proved the ’918 flash‑DRAM hybrid memory module claims were obvious over Harris, JEDEC FBDIMM standards, Amidi and Hajeck. All 30 challenged claims were declared unpatentable.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Netlist, Inc.
Samsung successfully challenged claim 16 of Netlist’s ’912 memory‑module patent, with the PTAB finding the claim obvious over the Ellsberry reference and unpatentable.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Netlist, Inc.
Samsung and Micron successfully challenged Netlist’s 9,858,215 B1 memory‑module patent. The PTAB found all 29 claims obvious over Perego and the JEDEC DDR2 standard, rendering them unpatentable.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Netlist, Inc.
The USPTO denied Samsung's request for Director Review of the PTAB’s Final Written Decision in the Netlist IPR, leaving the Board’s ruling unchanged.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Netlist, Inc.
A PTAB memorandum issued on July 29, 2025 instructs panels to resolve all petition‑raised grounds in a single final written decision for IPR and PGR cases lacking an oral hearing, aiming for streamlined rulings.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Netlist, Inc.
Samsung has filed a PGR petition challenging Netlist’s 12,373,366 DIMM patent, asserting lack of written description and obviousness over older memory‑module art. The petition seeks cancellation of all 38 claims.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Network-1 Technologies, Inc.
Samsung has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of all 20 claims of Network‑1’s U.S. Patent 11,606,204, alleging obviousness over a suite of prior‑art references covering mobile authentication and key‑exchange techniques.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Network-1 Technologies, Inc.
Samsung Electronics has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of all 20 claims of Network‑1’s U.S. Patent 11,973,864, alleging obviousness over a combination of prior‑art cryptographic references. The petition details extensive claim‑by‑claim mappings and requests institution of the review.
Disney Entertainment & Sports LLC v.Adeia Technologies Inc.
Disney Entertainment & Sports LLC has filed an IPR petition challenging claims 1‑5 and 9‑13 of U.S. Patent 9,235,428, alleging obviousness over a combination of prior‑art references covering web proxies and GUI rendering.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v.Netlist, Inc.
Samsung Electronics has filed an IPR petition against Netlist’s U.S. Patent No. 12,373,366, seeking to invalidate all 38 claims as obvious. The petition relies on a combination of prior‑art patents by Perego, Harris, and Amidi covering memory‑module architecture and power‑management techniques.
NIUM PTE. LTD. v.Intercurrency Software LLC
NIUM PTE. LTD. and Intercurrency Software LLC jointly moved to terminate IPR2025-01586 after reaching a confidential settlement over a foreign‑exchange trading patent.
GENERAC POWER SYSTEMS, INC. et al. v.Champion Power Equipment, Inc.
Generac’s IPR against Champion Power’s generator patent continues after Harbor Freight Tools and MWE Investments settle and exit the case. The Board granted motions to terminate the settling parties and keep the settlement confidential.
GENERAC POWER SYSTEMS, INC. et al. v.Champion Power Equipment, Inc.
Harbor Freight Tools and Champion Power Equipment filed a joint request asking the PTAB to keep their settlement agreement confidential and separate from the patent file.
NIUM PTE. LTD. v.Intercurrency Software LLC
NIUM PTE. Ltd. and Intercurrency Software LLC settled their IPR dispute before trial. The Board granted the joint motion to terminate, dismissing the petition.
GENERAC POWER SYSTEMS, INC. et al. v.Champion Power Equipment, Inc.
MWE Investments and Champion Power Equipment have settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 11,143,145 and jointly request that the settlement be treated as business confidential information. The petition also seeks MWE's withdrawal from the proceeding.
Fortinet, Inc. v.Netskope, Inc.
Fortinet has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of Netskope's U.S. Patent 8,117,639 covering network access control. The petition relies on Richmond, Wood, and Teraslinna as anticipatory and obviousness prior art.
NIUM PTE. LTD. v.Intercurrency Software LLC
NIUM PTE. LTD. has filed a petition for inter partes review seeking to invalidate all 16 claims of Intercurrency Software’s ’701 patent, alleging obviousness over multiple prior‑art trading system disclosures.
GENERAC POWER SYSTEMS, INC. et al. v.Champion Power Equipment, Inc.
Generac and co‑petitioners have filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate all 16 claims of Champion’s ’145 dual‑fuel generator patent, alleging obviousness over a suite of prior‑art engine manuals and patents.
Fortinet, Inc. v.Netskope, Inc.
Fortinet has filed an IPR petition challenging Netskope's U.S. Patent 8,327,426, which covers federated single‑sign‑on methods. The petitioner alleges lack of novelty and obviousness based on the Hinton and Burch prior‑art references, seeking cancellation of all thirteen claims.
Fortinet, Inc. v.Netskope, Inc.
Fortinet has petitioned the PTAB to institute an IPR against Netskope’s 7,593,936 patent, asserting that all 22 claims are anticipated or obvious over Honig, Oliphant, and Vinberg. The petition seeks cancellation of the entire claim set.
American Airlines et al. v.Intellectual Ventures I LLC
American Airlines and Southwest Airlines have filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of 21 claims of Intellectual Ventures' 802.11 dual‑mode communication patent, alleging obviousness over multiple prior‑art references.
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.