Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v. Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc.

Askeladden L.L.C.vsCalabrese Stemer LLC

The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding all four challenged claims unpatentable. The Board determined that the prior art reference, Horie, anticipated the claims under 35 U.S.C. § 102. This decision relates to Mobile Payment Authorization technology and is tied to related District Court litigation.

IKEA Supply AG et al.vsEverlight Electronics Co., Ltd.

IKEA Supply AG has filed an IPR challenging U.S. Patent No. 7,554,126 held by Everlight Electronics Co., Ltd., asserting that the LED claims are unpatentable. The petition relies heavily on grounds of anticipation and obviousness using multiple prior art references. This challenge targets numerous structural features within light emitting diode technology.

smaXtec Inc. et al.vsST Reproductive Technologies, LLC et al.

The PTAB found that the challenged claims of patent 9844206 were unpatentable over prior art combinations, primarily citing Trevarthen and Laitinen/Buchanan/Liao. The Board adopted the Patent Owner's claim construction for 'implanted in an animal,' meaning implanted within the animal.

Samsung Austin Semiconductor, LLC et al.vsSung, Chien-Min

The PTAB found all 20 claims of U.S. Patent No. 9138862 unpatentable by anticipation or obviousness over Sung ’026. The technology relates to Chemical Mechanical Polishing (CMP) pad conditioning methods, and the Board concluded that Petitioner successfully established invalidity across all grounds presented.

Visa, Inc.vsCortex MCP, Inc.

The Board found that the majority of claims (24 out of 33) were unpatentable over various combinations of prior art references. The key finding was that Oborne teaches core tokenization elements, while other combinations failed to provide sufficient motivation for the claimed improvements.