Apple Inc. v. Resonant Systems, Inc.

IPR2024-00697

The Board found all five challenged claims unpatentable over various combinations of prior art references. Petitioner successfully argued that combining existing technologies was obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art (POSITA).

Jurisdiction
US PTAB
Case Number
IPR2024-00697
Judge(s)
KARL D. EASTHOM, NORMAN H. BEAMER, BRIAN D. RANGE
Decision Date
4 December 2024

Detailed Summary

In this final IPR decision, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board determined that Claims 1-5 were invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) based on various combinations of prior art references including Shahoian, Cosper, Rossi, Ramsay, and Aldrich. The Petitioner successfully demonstrated that a POSITA would have been motivated to combine these teachings to achieve the claimed features in the field of Linear Resonant Vibration Modules (LRVM).

Practitioner Note

This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in Apple Inc. vs Resonant Systems, Inc. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.

Arctic Invent — IP Strategy

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.

Talk to our patent team →

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.

Strategy Consult

Facing a similar patent matter?

Arctic's litigation team uses precedent data like this to build winning arguments.

Get a Strategy Call