EP Family Corp. v. Office Kick Inc.

Tesla, Inc.vsIntellectual Ventures II LLC

Tesla has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate five claims of Intellectual Ventures’ U.S. Pat. 7,181,743. The challenger argues the claims are obvious over the Welch whitepaper and related publications, and disputes any discretionary denial.

Deere & CompanyvsDavid’s Dozer V-Loc System, Inc. et al.

Deere & Company seeks director review of the PTAB’s denial to institute an IPR against a grading‑system patent owned by David’s Dozer V‑Loc System. The patent owner contends the petition misstates the law on motivation to combine and that the prior‑art teaches away, making review futile.

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al.vsWilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc.

Samsung Electronics challenged 12 claims of Wilus Institute's wireless communication patent (11470595) based on obviousness. The PTAB issued an institution decision, finding reasonable likelihood that Samsung will prevail regarding unpatentability.

Toyota Motor Corp. et al.vsEmerging Automotive LLC

The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding that nearly all asserted claims (1, 2, and 4-20) were unpatentable over various combinations of prior art references. The Board adopted the Petitioner's arguments regarding obviousness, specifically finding that combining Rector with Kleve taught or suggested limitations for Claim 1.

CISCO SYSTEMS, INC.vsUMBRA TECHNOLOGIES LTD.

The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding that the Petitioner failed to prove unpatentability for claims 15-20 of the '595 patent. Claims 1-14 were mooted by disclaimer, resulting in no challenged claims being found unpatentable.