Short Summary
Samsung successfully secured the institution of IPR against Wilus regarding a wireless communication patent, challenging claims 1-10 based on obviousness. The Board found sufficient evidence that Samsung could prevail.
Detailed Summary
In this Institution Decision, the PTAB granted inter partes review (IPR) for Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. against Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc.'s Patent 11,116,035 B2. The petitioner challenged claims 1-10 on grounds of obviousness (35 U.S.C. § 103), asserting that the claimed wireless communication terminal was an obvious combination of prior art references including Zhou, Cherian, and Kim. The Board determined that Samsung presented sufficiently persuasive reasoning regarding the combination of these teachings, particularly concerning timer setting based on ACK policies, leading to the institution of trial.
Practitioner Note
This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. vs Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
Harbor Freight Tools USA, Inc. et al.vsChampion Power Equipment, Inc.
Harbor Freight Tools, Generac and MWE have reached a settlement with Champion Power Equipment in IPR2025‑00805 and are asking the PTAB to keep the agreement confidential. The request cites statutory authority to treat settlement documents as business‑confidential information.
Stanley Black & Decker, Inc.vsViking Arm AS
Stanley Black & Decker filed an unopposed motion to dismiss an IPR against Viking Arm before the Board had considered the merits, citing a settlement agreement and CFR provisions to preserve resources.
3Shape A/S et al.vsMedit Corporation et al.
3Shape A/S filed an IPR petition challenging Medit Corporation’s patent on digital dentistry technology. The petitioner argues that the claimed 3D scanning methods are obvious under 35 U.S.C. §103, based on combining prior art systems.
Western Digital Technologies, Inc. et al.vsGodo Kaisha IP Bridge 1
The PTAB denied institution of an IPR petition filed by Western Digital Technologies against Godo Kaisha IP Bridge 1 because the patent owner had statutorily disclaimed all challenged claims.
Ericsson Inc. et al.vsPegasus Wireless Innovation LLC
Nokia, KT, and Pegasus have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 10,638,463 and filed a joint motion to terminate the IPR as to Nokia. The Board is asked to dismiss the proceeding under 35 U.S.C. § 317(a).
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.