Metallurgy — US PTAB Patent Cases
3 decisions indexed
Page 1 of 1 · 3 total
POSCO Co., Ltd. et al. v.ARCELORMITTAL
POSCO challenges ArcelorMittal’s steel‑related patent in IPR2024‑01376, defending the Board’s decision to institute the case. The petitioner argues the merits are strong, overlap with parallel ITC proceedings is minimal, and the Board correctly applied Fintiv factors.
POSCO Co., Ltd. et al. v.ARCELORMITTAL
ArcelorMittal has filed Director Review requests for two IPRs, and POSCO has five days to submit a limited response without new evidence.
POSCO Co., Ltd. et al. v.ARCELORMITTAL
POSCO has filed an authorized response seeking Director Review of the PTAB’s decision to institute an IPR against ArcelorMittal’s steel patent. The petitioner argues the Board’s reliance on Fintiv precedent and lack of overlap with parallel ITC proceedings makes institution improper.
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.