Short Summary
Bombardier Recreational Products Inc. successfully petitioned the PTAB to institute an IPR against MHL Custom, Inc.'s hydrofoil watercraft patent (9586659). The Board found a reasonable likelihood that claims 16-23, 26-28 are obvious over prior art references Evolo and Woolley.
Detailed Summary
Bombardier Recreational Products Inc. successfully petitioned the PTAB to institute an Inter Partes Review (IPR) against MHL Custom, Inc.'s patent covering hydrofoil watercraft design. The petitioner argued that claims 16-23 and dependent claims 26-28 were obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103 when combining the Evolo reference with Woolley's patent. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) adopted the petitioner's definition of the level of ordinary skill in the art, confirming that there was sufficient evidence to establish a reasonable likelihood of unpatentability for the challenged claims.
Practitioner Note
This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in Bombardier Recreational Products Inc. vs MHL Custom, Inc. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
Tesla, Inc.vsGraphite Charging Company LLC
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding that the claims were not unpatentable by either anticipation (Cooley) or obviousness (Wang/AESO Report). The Board adopted the Patent Owner's claim construction of 'current' as referring to the present, rejecting the petitioner's interpretation.
Microsoft Corp.vsVirtaMove, Corp.
Microsoft and VirtaMove settled their inter partes review dispute over Patent 7,784,058. The Board granted the joint motion to terminate, dismissing the petitions and keeping the settlement confidential.
Apple Inc.vsGinko LLC
Apple Inc.'s IPR petition against Ginko LLC was denied by the PTAB, as the Board found insufficient evidence that cited prior art disclosed the claimed contact permission settings.
Tesla, Inc.vsPerceptive Automata LLC
The USPTO granted institution for IPR2025-01574 after determining the petitioner had a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on at least one challenged claim. This decision allows the case to proceed to merits review.
Yangtze Memory Technologies Company, Ltd. et al.vsMicron Technology, Inc. et al.
Yangtze Memory Technologies petitions the PTAB to invalidate 18 claims of Micron's 3D NAND patent, arguing anticipation and obviousness over four prior‑art references. The petition seeks institution and cancellation of the claims.
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.