Short Summary
The PTAB found several claims unpatentable over various combinations of prior art, specifically targeting anti-counterfeiting micro mirror technology. Claims 1, 2, 5, 6, and 12–20 were deemed obvious based on the combination of Fuhse847 and Rich.
Detailed Summary
In this final written decision, the Board determined that multiple claims from patent number 11448863 were unpatentable over combinations of prior art references. The Petitioner successfully demonstrated obviousness for Claim 1 and Claim 12 using Fuhse847 and Rich, particularly regarding automating computations for micro mirror arrays. While some grounds failed to establish obviousness (e.g., Claims 3, 4, 7–11), the Board ultimately found a total of 16 claims unpatentable over various combinations of prior art references like Fuhse847, Rich, Morford, and Sauvage-Vincent.
Practitioner Note
This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in Giesecke+Devrient GmbH et al. vs Lumenco, LLC is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
Motorola Mobility LLC et al.vsMultifold International Incorporated Pte. Ltd.
Motorola Mobility and Google settled with Multifold International over U.S. Patent 9,146,589, leading to a joint motion to terminate the IPR. The Board granted the termination and kept the settlement confidential.
Apple Inc.vsApex Beam Technologies LLC
Apple Inc. successfully petitioned to challenge Apex Beam Technologies LLC's patent (11,108,639) in the PTAB, leading to institution of the IPR. The Board found sufficient evidence that the claims related to wireless scheduling mechanisms are unpatentable over combinations of Fakoorian-1 and Takahashi. This sets up a major IP battle regarding advanced cellular technology standards.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al.vsOne-E-Way, Inc.
The PTAB issued multiple institution decisions, granting IPR for several cases including IPR2025-01516 after finding a reasonable likelihood of success. Other proceedings were denied based on discretionary or non-merits grounds.
ClearCorrect Operating, LLC et al.vsAlign Technology, Inc.
ClearCorrect Operating challenged Align Technology's dental treatment planning patent (11,369,456 B2) before the PTAB. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on Ground 1, based on obviousness over Chishti-511, Chishti-876, and Sachdeva.
Activision Blizzard, Inc.vsMilestone Entertainment, LLC
Activision Blizzard successfully petitioned the PTAB to institute an IPR against Milestone Entertainment's patent (11335164) covering electronic game systems and prizing. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on multiple grounds, primarily based on obviousness over prior art references like Kelly.
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.