Short Summary
The Director denied requests for review in multiple IPR proceedings involving Google and Mullen Industries regarding patent 11234117. This decision maintains the prior institution decisions across several related cases.
Detailed Summary
This Director Review Decision addresses several International Patent Litigation (IPR) proceedings, including IPR2025-00366 concerning U.S. Patent No. 11,234,117 B2. The Office reviewed requests for review of prior institution decisions filed by the petitioner group (Google LLC et al.) and their authorized responses. After reviewing all submissions, the Director denied all requests for Director Review across the listed proceedings.
Practitioner Note
This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in Google LLC et al. vs Mullen Industries LLC is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
CADENCE DESIGN SYSTEMS, INC.vsSemiconductor Design Technologies, LLC
Cadence and Semiconductor Design Technologies have settled their dispute and jointly moved to terminate the IPR covering U.S. Patent 7,603,636, an electronic design automation patent.
Solventum CorporationvsWound Healing Technologies Corp.
Solventum Corp. has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate all 13 claims of Wound Healing Technologies' wound‑dressing patent. The petition argues the claims are obvious over prior‑art references such as Argenta, Hu, Biggie and Lockwood.
Amazon.com, Inc. et al.vsAudio Pod IP, LLC
Amazon has filed a Request for Director Review challenging the USPTO’s discretionary denial of its IPR petition on the basis of a new six‑year “settled expectations” rule. The petition argues the rule exceeds statutory authority, violates the APA, and is arbitrary and capricious. Amazon seeks reversal of the denial and institution of the IPR.
Light & Wonder, Inc. et al.vsEvolution Malta Limited
Light & Wonder has filed an IPR petition challenging Evolution Malta’s ’024 roulette‑payout patent, asserting anticipation and obviousness over Kido, Yee, and Baron prior art.
Wise PLC et al.vs--
Wise PLC and Intercurrency Software LLC entered a settlement that grants Wise a royalty‑free license to several patents, includes a covenant not to sue, and results in the dismissal of both the related lawsuit and the IPR proceeding.
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.