Industry Sector

Environmental technology — US PTAB Patent Cases

5 decisions indexed

Page 1 of 1 · 5 total

patent · Aug 4, 2025

PacifiCorp et al. v.MES, Inc.

· IPR2025-00718

BirchTech Corp. petitions the PTAB Director to overturn a referral decision, arguing that proceeding with the IPR would duplicate the ongoing MDL concerning mercury‑control patents and waste resources. The brief cites efficiency concerns and prior PTAB rulings to request denial of institution.

patent · Aug 4, 2025

PacifiCorp et al. v.MES, Inc.

· IPR2025-00718

PacifiCorp and its affiliates have petitioned the PTAB to invalidate U.S. Patent 10,926,218, which covers mercury removal from coal‑fired power plant flue gas. The petition alleges anticipation and obviousness over several prior‑art references and argues lack of written‑description support for key claim limitations. The Board has yet to decide whether to institute the IPR.

patent · Mar 24, 2025

PacifiCorp et al. v.MES, Inc.

· IPR2025-00688

PacifiCorp and affiliated utilities have filed a Director Review petition seeking to overturn the PTAB’s decision to institute an IPR on a mercury‑control patent. The patent owner argues the MDL already provides a more efficient forum and that the Board’s action would cause duplicative litigation.

patent · Mar 24, 2025

PacifiCorp et al. v.MES, Inc.

· IPR2025-00688

PacifiCorp and affiliated utilities have filed an IPR petition challenging U.S. Patent 10,933,370, which covers mercury removal from coal‑fired power plant flue gas. The petition alleges anticipation and obviousness over four prior‑art references and argues the patent lacks written‑description support for its priority date. The Board’s decision on institution is pending.

patent · Jan 17, 2025

Berkshire Hathaway Energy Company et al. v.MES, Inc.

· IPR2025-00278

Berkshire Hathaway Energy and affiliated utilities have filed an IPR petition challenging U.S. Patent 10,343,114, which covers a mercury‑removal method for coal‑fired power plants. The petition argues the claims are obvious over earlier conference papers and patents, and that the patent lacks priority support for its bromine‑related limitations.

Arctic Invent — IP Strategy

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.

Talk to our patent team →