Cisco Systems, Inc. v. Lionra Technologies Limited

IPR2024-00734

The PTAB found claims unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) based on a combination of prior art references (Gai, Yip, Kwan, and Georgiou). The Board determined that an ordinary skilled artisan would have been motivated to combine these teachings to enhance network security and implement advanced ACL functions.

Jurisdiction
US PTAB
Case Number
IPR2024-00734
Judge(s)
ANNETTE R. REIMERS, STEVEN M. AMUNDSON, RUSSELL E. CASS
Decision Date
4 February 2024

Detailed Summary

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board issued a Final Written Decision finding the challenged claims unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). The petitioner successfully demonstrated that combining prior art references—specifically Gai, Yip, Kwan, and Georgiou—would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled artisan in the field of network switching and access control lists (ACLs). Key findings included motivation to combine Yip's ACL concepts with Gai's device architecture for security improvements, and the combination of dynamic IP learning (Kwan) with Gai's system. Furthermore, the Board clarified that 'a memory circuit' can comprise multiple interconnected components, thereby finding all limitations of Claim 15 were taught by the combined references.

Practitioner Note

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

Related Cases

patentIPR2025-01182

Google LLCvsSecure Communication Technologies, LLC

Google has petitioned the PTAB to invalidate eight claims of a proximity‑beacon patent owned by Secure Communication Technologies, arguing that the claims are anticipated or obvious over prior‑art references such as Mgrdechian and its combinations with Kaplan, Kulakowski, Eagle, and Behrens.

patentIPR2025-01490

FedEx Corporation et al.vsVALTRUS INNOVATIONS LTD.

FedEx has filed a petition for rehearing of the PTAB Director’s denial to institute an IPR on its storage‑device performance monitoring patent. The petition relies on an expanded stipulation to waive district‑court invalidity grounds and cites recent informative decisions to argue that the patent’s post‑expiration assertion makes denial inappropriate.

patentIPR2025-00826

Google LLCvsSandpiper CDN, LLC

Google has filed a Request for Director Review seeking reversal of an institution decision that allowed review of an expired Sandpiper CDN patent. The petition argues the Board ignored settled‑expectation precedent and that the petition fails the likelihood‑of‑success threshold.

patentIPR2024-01032

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al.vsST CasesTech, LLC et al.

Samsung, Harman and ST CasesTech entered a joint settlement, leading the PTAB to terminate eight related IPRs without a final decision. The Board granted confidentiality for the settlement agreement.

patentIPR2025-00100

MediaTek Inc.vsDAEDALUS PRIME LLC

MediaTek and Daedalus Prime filed a joint motion to terminate their IPR, accompanied by a confidential settlement agreement. The PTAB granted the termination and ordered the settlement to be kept confidential.

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