Short Summary
An email notifies the parties that ParkerVision’s Director Review request in IPR2024‑00934 has been received, allowing Texas Instruments a 15‑page response.
Detailed Summary
The PTAB sent a Director Review Request notice for IPR2024‑00934, indicating that ParkerVision, Inc. has asked the Director to review the case. Texas Instruments, the petitioner, may file a response limited to the issues raised, no more than 15 pages, within five business days, and no new evidence is allowed. The Director will decide whether to grant or deny the review.
Practitioner Note
This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in Texas Instruments Incorporated vs ParkerVision, Inc. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
iRhythm, Inc.vsWelch Allyn, Inc. et al.
iRhythm challenges the PTAB Acting Director’s denial of five IPR petitions on the ground that a newly issued ‘settled expectations’ rule was applied retroactively. The company argues the rule conflicts with precedent and statutory limits, and would burden the PTAB and stifle innovation.
Apple Inc.vsSmith Interface Technologies, LLC
The PTAB issued a final written decision finding that the challenged claims were not obvious over the asserted prior art combinations. The Board specifically rejected arguments regarding progressive menu sliding during gesture detection.
Airwallex Pty. Ltd. et al.vs--
Airwallex filed an unopposed motion to withdraw its IPR petition after reaching a settlement with Intercurrency Software. The parties also filed a joint stipulation of dismissal with prejudice in the underlying district court case.
Nintendo Co. Ltd. et al.vsResonant Systems, Inc.
Nintendo filed a motion to withdraw its IPR against Resonant Systems’ 8,860,337 patent. The Board has authorized the filing, and the patent owner does not oppose the withdrawal.
Amazon.com, Inc. et al.vsAudio Pod IP, LLC
The PTAB Director emailed the parties confirming receipt of petitioner’s Director Review requests for six IPRs, including IPR2025-00769. Patent Owner may file a 15‑page response within five business days, with no new evidence allowed.
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.