Retail technology — US PTAB Patent Cases
4 decisions indexed
Page 1 of 1 · 4 total
Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. v.H2 Intellect LLC
Home Depot's patent owner H2 Intellect and Samsung settled the related district court case, prompting a joint motion to stay PTAB deadlines. The parties seek a 30‑day stay to finalize the settlement and dismiss the lawsuit.
GetTattle, Inc. v.AfterWords, Inc.
GetTattle petitions the PTAB to invalidate claims of AfterWords' ‘811 patent covering transaction‑specific surveys. The petition relies on two prior‑art publications, Douglas and Ganesh, asserting they anticipate all claimed elements. Claim constructions are provided to bolster the anticipation argument.
Quotient Technology, LLC et al. v.Intelligent Clearing Network Inc. et al.
Quotient Technology petitions the PTAB to institute an IPR against Intelligent Clearing Network’s 9,098,855 coupon‑processing patent, asserting that all 57 claims are anticipated or obvious over six prior‑art references. The petition argues that discretionary denial factors do not apply, seeking institution of the review.
Quotient Technology, LLC et al. v.Intelligent Clearing Network Inc. et al.
Quotient Technology has petitioned the PTAB to institute an IPR against U.S. Patent 10,846,729, seeking cancellation of all 20 claims as obvious over prior‑art coupon systems. The petition argues that the Board should not deny institution under discretionary standards.
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.