Power tools — US PTAB Patent Cases
5 decisions indexed
Page 1 of 1 · 5 total
Koki Holdings America Ltd. et al. v.Kyocera Senco Industrial Tools, Inc.
Koki Holdings has filed an IPR petition challenging all 20 claims of Kyocera Senco’s 2019 gas‑spring nailer patent, alleging obviousness over multiple prior‑art references.
Koki Holdings America Ltd. et al. v.Kyocera Senco Industrial Tools, Inc.
Koki Holdings has filed an IPR petition challenging all 15 claims of Kyocera Senco’s 2023 gas‑spring nailer patent, asserting obviousness over several older patents and arguing that the “lifter” term is means‑plus‑function.
Koki Holdings America Ltd. et al. v.Kyocera Senco Industrial Tools, Inc.
Koki Holdings has petitioned an IPR against Kyocera Senco’s 11,034,007 gas‑spring nailer patent, asserting anticipation and obviousness over six decades‑old nail‑gun references and challenging claim constructions of “lifter” and “storage chamber.” The petition seeks cancellation of all twenty claims.
Koki Holdings America Ltd. et al. v.Kyocera Senco Industrial Tools, Inc.
Koki Holdings America Ltd. successfully convinced the PTAB to institute IPR proceedings against Kyocera Senco Industrial Tools, Inc., finding a reasonable likelihood that claims 1-20 are unpatentable. The Board issued key claim constructions regarding 'lifter' and 'gas pressure system,' paving the way for trial.
Klein Tools, Inc. v.Milwaukee Electric Tool Corporation et al.
Klein Tools responded to Milwaukee Electric Tool’s request for Director Review, arguing the Board correctly instituted the IPR under Fintiv and §314. The petitioner emphasizes that the ITC overlap arguments are misplaced and that the merits of the petition are strong.
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.