High-speed data communications — US PTAB Patent Cases
4 decisions indexed
Page 1 of 1 · 4 total
Volex plc v.CREDO TECHNOLOGY GROUP LTD.
Volex has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of all 14 claims of Credo’s active Ethernet cable patent, arguing obviousness over multiple prior‑art references and asserting that discretionary denial is unwarranted.
Volex plc v.CREDO TECHNOLOGY GROUP LTD.
Volex plc and Credo Technology Group have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent No. 10,877,233 and jointly moved to terminate the inter partes review. The Board is asked to dismiss the proceeding under statutory authority.
Volex plc v.CREDO TECHNOLOGY GROUP LTD.
Volex plc and Credo Technology Group have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent No. 11,012,252 and jointly moved to terminate the inter partes review. The Board is asked to dismiss the proceeding under 35 U.S.C. §317.
Amphenol Corporation v.Credo Technology Group Ltd.
Amphenol petitions the PTAB to invalidate Credo’s ’233 active‑cable patent, asserting that prior‑art references render all twenty claims obvious. The petition also argues that discretionary denial is unwarranted.
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.