Short Summary
Exhibit 2002 is the settlement agreement in IPR2025-01392 between Top Glory Trading Group, DP Dream Pairs and Cole Haan, ending the challenge to U.S. Patent 10,327,511 covering footwear design.
Detailed Summary
In IPR2025-01392, Top Glory Trading Group Inc. and DP Dream Pairs, Inc. challenged Cole Haan LLC's U.S. Patent 10,327,511, which pertains to shoe design. The parties subsequently executed a settlement agreement, provided as Exhibit 2002, thereby terminating the inter partes review. The exhibit consists solely of page headers identifying the case and does not contain substantive argumentation, claim constructions, or prior‑art references, serving only to document the parties' resolution of the dispute.
Practitioner Note
This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in TOP GLORY TRADING GROUP INC. et al. vs Cole Haan LLC et al. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
Sinclair Pharma Limited et al.vsHydraFacial LLC
The Board initiated a sua sponte Director Review of an IPR concerning HydraFacial's facial treatment device patent after the ITC found the claims valid and commercially successful. The proceeding is stayed pending the Director's opinion.
Microsoft Corporation et al.vsX1 Discovery, Inc.
The PTAB denied X1 Discovery’s request for an extension to file Director Review briefs in three IPRs against Microsoft, finding no good cause and emphasizing the need for timely filing.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al.vsW&Wsens Devices Inc.
The PTAB granted institution for PGR2025-00082 after reviewing discretionary and non-discretionary considerations. The petitioner successfully demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of prevailing or that the challenged claims are unpatentable.
Google LLCvsVirtaMove, Corp.
The USPTO Director denied Google’s petitions for review of the institution decisions in four IPRs involving VirtaMove’s patent, leaving the original denial of institution in place.
GLOBALFOUNDRIES Inc. et al.vsOAK IP LLC
Globalfoundries and OAK IP settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 9,905,691 before the Board instituted a trial. The settlement agreement was treated as confidential business information, and the proceeding was terminated.
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.