Tobacco products — US PTAB Patent Cases
4 decisions indexed
Page 1 of 1 · 4 total
Ecto World, LLC d/b/a Demand Vape et al. v.RAI Strategic Holdings, Inc. et al.
Ecto World petitions PTAB to invalidate RAI Strategic's 2024 electronic‑cigarette patent, arguing lack of written description and obviousness over Takeuchi, Kim, Pienemann and Susa. The petition seeks institution and opposes discretionary denial.
Ecto World, LLC d/b/a Demand Vape et al. v.RAI Strategic Holdings, Inc. et al.
The PTAB denied the institution of a Post-Grant Review (PGR) petition challenging claims related to electrically-powered aerosol generators. The Board found that the petitioner failed to meet its burden of showing a likelihood of unpatentability, despite narrowing claim construction on 'smoking article' to devices containing tobacco.
Ecto World, LLC d/b/a Demand Vape et al. v.RAI Strategic Holdings, Inc. et al.
The PTAB denied Ecto World's petition to institute IPR against RAI Strategic Holdings regarding a tobacco-containing smoking article, citing the petitioner failed to demonstrate material error despite using previously presented prior art.
Shenzhen Kangvape Technology Co., Ltd. v.RAI Strategic Holdings, Inc. et al.
Shenzhen Kangvape Technology Co., Ltd. successfully challenged RAI Strategic Holdings, Inc.'s patent on electrically heated smoking articles. The PTAB instituted the IPR after finding a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on claims based on anticipation and obviousness over prior art references like Morgan and Takeuchi.
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.