Information processing — US PTAB Patent Cases
4 decisions indexed
Page 1 of 1 · 4 total
Samsung Electronic Co. Ltd. et al. v.Maxell, LTD.
Samsung successfully challenged Maxell’s ’086 patent, leading the PTAB to find all asserted claims unpatentable as obvious. The Board relied on a combination of prior‑art references covering touch‑screen input methods.
Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. et al. v.Maxell, Ltd.
Samsung Electronics challenged Maxell's touch interface security patent (8982086), arguing obviousness over prior art including Rogers and Rosenberg. The PTAB found reasonable likelihood of unpatentability for several claims, leading to the institution of the IPR and granting trial on specific claims.
Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. et al. v.Maxell, Ltd.
The PTAB found all challenged claims unpatentable as obvious (103), primarily based on the combination of Rogers and Rosenberg. The Board rejected the Patent Owner's attempt to narrow claim language regarding 'registering modes,' holding that they are input modes within a single operating mode.
Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd et al. v.Maxell, Ltd.
Samsung Electronics successfully secured institution at the PTAB for its IPR against Maxell's patent 11017815. The Board found that Samsung presented a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on multiple claims, overcoming prior art challenges based on combinations of references like Horn and Baumgartner.
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.