Wireless communication — US PTAB Patent Cases
4 decisions indexed
Page 1 of 1 · 4 total
Apple Inc. v.S.M.R Innovations LTD et al.
Apple Inc. has filed a petition challenging U.S. Patent No. 10,547,648, asserting that its claims related to media routing and streaming are obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The petitioner relies on multiple combinations of prior art references, including Zhang, Fillebrown, Pasanen, and Skinner, to demonstrate unpatentability.
Apple, Inc. v.THL Holding Company, LLC
Apple successfully convinced the PTAB that THL Holding Company's patent claims related to device location and pairing were obvious over a combination of six prior art references. The Board issued an institution decision, setting the stage for a full trial on the challenged claims.
TransCore, LP v.Hand Held Products, Inc.
TransCore challenged U.S. Patent No. 8,919,654 in a PTAB petition, asserting that the wireless communication technology is anticipated or obvious over prior art references Tolonen, Katz, and Ishizu. The petitioner argues that claimed features like dynamic protocol switching and SDR capabilities are already disclosed in these sources.
TikTok Inc. et al. v.Cellspin Soft, Inc.
TikTok Inc. successfully petitioned for institution of its IPR against Cellspin Soft, Inc., challenging claims 1-10 on obviousness grounds (35 U.S.C. § 103). The Board found that the petitioner's stipulation regarding parallel district court litigation favored institution under Fintiv factors.
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.