Short Summary
Zhuhai CosMX Battery challenges Ningde Amperex Technology’s battery electrolyte patent in IPR2025‑00405. The petitioner argues the Board correctly instituted the IPR and that the Patent Owner’s request for discretionary denial should be denied. Prior art references disclose the claimed electrolyte components.
Detailed Summary
In IPR2025‑00405, Zhuhai CosMX Battery Co., Ltd. contests U.S. Patent No. 11,769,910 owned by Ningde Amperex Technology Ltd., which claims lithium‑ion battery electrolytes containing fluoroethylene carbonate and propanesultone. The petitioner’s authorized response asserts that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board properly instituted the IPR, finding a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on the majority of the 21 challenged claims (1‑6 and 12‑26). The response also rebuts the Patent Owner’s arguments that challenges to claims 20‑26 were forfeited and that the Director should overturn a prior discretionary denial, emphasizing that no new circumstances exist. The petition relies on multiple foreign patent publications (Zeng, Zhou, etc.) to show disclosure of the claimed elements.
Practitioner Note
This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in Zhuhai CosMX Battery Co., Ltd. vs Ningde Amperex Technology Ltd. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
Samsung Austin Semiconductor, LLC et al.vsSung, Chien-Min
The PTAB sent an email directing Samsung Austin Semiconductor to file a limited 15‑page response to a Director Review request for IPR2024‑00534 and IPR2024‑00535, prohibiting new evidence and additional briefings.
Padagis US LLC et al.vsNeurelis, Inc.
The PTAB held that all 36 claims of Neurelis’s intranasal benzodiazepine patent are obvious over prior art references Gwozdz, Meezan ’962, and Cartt ’784, rendering the patent entirely unpatentable.
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. et al.vsOMNI MEDSCI, INC.
Apple seeks to invalidate Omni MedSci’s wearable health‑monitor patent, arguing that all challenged claims are obvious over prior art. The petition requests the PTAB to institute an IPR and cancel the claims.
Google LLC et al.vsSoftView LLC
Google has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate claims 1‑22 of SoftView’s ’729 patent, alleging they are obvious over prior‑art handheld browsers (Zaurus, Pad++) and SVG standards, with claim 21 also relying on SVF. The petition invokes estoppel and issue preclusion based on earlier PTAB findings for related patents.
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company LimitedvsAdvanced Integrated Circuit Process LLC
The PTAB denied the petitioners’ requests for Director Review of the institution decisions in two IPRs concerning patents 8,198,686 and 8,907,425.
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.
Disclaimer: This page contains an automated summary based on publicly available judicial records. The content is generated for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Always verify details against the original source judgment before relying on this information for any legal purpose. If you believe any information is inaccurate, please contact us.