Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited v. Advanced Integrated Circuit Process LLC

IPR2025-00683

TSMC seeks a Director Review of the PTAB’s discretionary denial to institute an IPR against patent 8,907,425. The patent owner argues the denial was proper and TSMC’s request is procedurally defective. The review request remains pending.

Jurisdiction
US PTAB
Case Number
IPR2025-00683
Filing Date
26 March 2025
Status
ok

Related Cases

patentIPR2024-01033

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al.vsStaton Techiya, LLC

Samsung Electronics challenges Staton Techiya's patent claims regarding smart earphones, asserting that the core features are obvious combinations of existing prior art. The petition targets 30 claims related to ambient sound enhancement and acoustic noise cancellation.

patentIPR2024-01094

Samsung Display Co., Ltd. et al.vsPictiva Displays International Limited et al.

Samsung Display Co., Ltd. successfully had its IPR petition instituted against Pictiva Displays International Limited regarding OLED technology claims. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on Claim 1 based on obviousness over prior art 'Ma'.

patentIPR2025-01066

Caption Health, Inc. et al.vsUniversity of British Columbia

Caption Health has filed an IPR petition challenging UBC’s 2021 ultrasound imaging patent, asserting that all 20 claims are obvious over a combination of prior‑art references describing view‑specific neural‑network quality assessment.

patentIPR2024-01447

Western Digital Technologies, Inc. et al.vsGodo Kaisha IP Bridge 1

Western Digital’s IPR against a magnetic tunnel junction patent was instituted, but the patent owner seeks Director review to vacate the institution, arguing that piecemeal review of one of nine related patents is inefficient and contrary to AIA policy.

patentIPR2024-01142

AT&T Enterprises, LLC et al.vsASUS Technology Licensing Inc.

Multiple major carriers, including AT&T and T-Mobile, have filed a Petition challenging ASUS Technology Licensing Inc.'s '868 patent on grounds of obviousness. The petitioners argue that the core concepts related to beam correspondence and higher layer signaling in 5G NR were anticipated or rendered obvious by prior art references Jung and Xiong. This challenge targets several claims relating to advanced wireless communication methods.

Arctic Invent — IP Strategy

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.

Talk to our patent team →

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.

Strategy Consult

Facing a similar patent matter?

Arctic's litigation team uses precedent data like this to build winning arguments.

Get a Strategy Call