Short Summary
Withrow Networks has requested a Director Review of IPR2025-00775. Google, the petitioner, may submit a limited response within five business days, and no new evidence is allowed.
Detailed Summary
In the IPR proceeding IPR2025-00775 concerning U.S. Patent No. 10,771,849, patent owner Withrow Networks Inc. has filed a request for Director Review. The PTAB Director has instructed that Google LLC, the petitioner, may file a response limited to the issues raised in the Director Review request, no longer than 15 pages, and that no new evidence may be submitted. The response must be filed within five business days, after which 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 Google LLC et al. vs Withrow Networks Inc. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
Kangxi Communications Technologies (Shanghai) Co., Ltd.vsSkyworks Solutions, Inc.
Kangxi Communications seeks Director Review of the PTAB’s discretionary denial to institute an IPR against Skyworks’ RF front‑end patent, alleging due‑process violations from retroactive policy changes. The petition contends that the Board improperly applied new Fintiv and “settled expectations” doctrines, and that the withdrawal of prior‑art defenses from a parallel ITC case should not trigger denial.
Snap Inc. et al.vsNokia Technologies Oy
Hisense USA Corporation and Nokia Technologies Oy have settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 7,532,808 and jointly request the Board to keep the settlement agreement confidential and terminate the proceeding as to Hisense.
BOTE, LLCvsSTEAMBOAT PADDLESPORTS, LLC.
The PTAB granted institution of IPR for 20 claims covering inflatable paddle boards. The Board found a reasonable likelihood that the challenger, BOTE, LLC, would prevail on obviousness grounds over prior art references like Hoffmann and Hoge.
Dropbox, Inc.vsMotion Offense LLC
Dropbox successfully secured institution of its Inter Partes Review against Motion Offense LLC's patent, challenging claims 17-21 based on obviousness. The Board found that Dropbox demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on several claims, overcoming the Patent Owner's arguments regarding prior art disclosure and prosecution history.
MediaTek Inc. et al.vsMOSAID Technologies Inc.
MediaTek successfully secured institution at the PTAB against MOSAID Technologies regarding integrated circuit patents related to power management. The Board accepted Petitioner's showing of reasonable likelihood that claims are unpatentable over prior art references, including Takahashi and Mizuno.
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.