Retail/E-commerce — US PTAB Patent Cases
4 decisions indexed
Page 1 of 1 · 4 total
Google LLC et al. v.EyesMatch Ltd.
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision rejecting all claims (1-18) because the Petitioner failed to demonstrate unpatentability by a preponderance of the evidence. The Board adopted a nuanced claim construction from District Court, requiring specific elements like reversed reflection and double distance for 'mirror mimicking.'
Quotient Technology, LLC et al. v.Intelligent Clearing Network Inc. et al.
The PTAB granted institution for Quotient Technology's IPR against Intelligent Clearing Network Inc.'s coupon redemption patent (9070133). The Board found a reasonable likelihood of success over Paul and Brown, despite rejecting the petitioner's narrow claim construction.
Quotient Technology, LLC et al. v.Intelligent Clearing Network Inc. et al.
The PTAB denied institution of IPR for Quotient Technology against Intelligent Clearing Network regarding patent 10846729. The Board found the Petitioner failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on obviousness grounds over prior art references like Aggarwal and Deaton.
Quotient Technology, LLC et al. v.Intelligent Clearing Network Inc. et al.
Quotient Technology successfully convinced the PTAB to institute review of patent 9098855 against Intelligent Clearing Network Inc. The Board found a reasonable likelihood that Petitioner would prevail on anticipation and obviousness grounds, primarily citing prior art from Deaton. This decision allows Quotient to proceed with challenging key claims related to coupon redemption networks.
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.