Computer hardware — US PTAB Patent Cases
129 decisions indexed
Page 5 of 5 · 129 total
Microchip Technology, Inc. v.Aptiv Technologies AG et al.
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding claims 13 and 14 unpatentable over prior art references Chang and Chang II based on obviousness (35 U.S.C. § 103). The Board adopted the Patent Owner's definition of POSITA and corrected a scrivener's error in claim 13, replacing 'hub' with 'host'.
Lenovo (United States) Inc. et al. v.Universal Connectivity Technologies Inc.
Lenovo and its allies have filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of 26 claims of Universal Connectivity Technologies' serial‑communication patent, alleging obviousness over Auld, MPEG‑2, Shin and Hiroshima references.
TCL Electronics Holdings Ltd. et al. v.Intellectual Ventures I LLC
TCL Electronics Holdings Ltd. failed to overcome obviousness challenges in an IPR before the PTAB, resulting in the denial of its petition. The Board found that Petitioner did not present a compelling or meritorious challenge despite analyzing multiple grounds against various prior art references.
LENOVO (UNITED STATES) INC. et al. v.Intellectual Ventures II
LENOVO failed its IPR challenge against Intellectual Ventures II's patent covering integrated circuit calibration, as the Board found Petitioner could not overcome key limitations of the claims using prior art. The denial centered on insufficient accounting for a three-dimensional 'valid operation range.'
Cisco Systems, Inc. v.Lionra Technologies Limited
Cisco’s petition argues that the Board correctly interpreted the term “memory circuit” to include multiple components, rejecting Lionra’s claim of procedural error. The Director Review Request is urged to be denied.
MICROSOFT CORPORATION et al. v.LiTL LLC
The USPTO denied director review requests for two IPR institution decisions involving Microsoft and other PC makers against LiTL LLC, leaving the original institution outcomes unchanged.
MICROSOFT CORPORATION et al. v.LiTL LLC
The USPTO denied Microsoft’s request for Director review of the PTAB’s decision denying institution of IPR2024-00457 (and the related IPR2024-00458). The denial leaves the institution refusal in place.
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.
Dell Technologies Inc. et al. v.LiTL LLC
The PTAB denied Dell and its partners’ request for rehearing and refused to institute an inter partes review of the ’229 patent covering convertible laptop display modes, finding the petitioner’s arguments on two‑accelerometer prior art insufficient.
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.