Short Summary
The PTAB denied the institution of Inter Partes Review (IPR) against Rich Media Club LLC's advertising patent. The Board found that Petitioner Duration Media lacked a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on grounds of obviousness (103).
Detailed Summary
Duration Media LLC sought to institute an IPR challenging claims 1-14 of U.S. Patent No. 11,741,482 B2 based on obviousness over prior art references Koeppel and Seo. The Board denied the petition under 35 U.S.C. § 314(a), finding that Petitioner failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of prevailing. Specifically, the Board construed the 'in response to' limitation as mandatory and determined that the combination of the cited prior art did not teach or render obvious this specific required sequence of determination followed by communication.
Practitioner Note
This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in Duration Media vs Rich Media Club LLC is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
MediaTek Inc. et al.vsMOSAID Technologies Inc.
MediaTek and MOSAID reached a settlement that led to the joint termination of four inter partes review proceedings. The Board granted confidentiality treatment for the settlement agreement.
Apple Inc.vsImberaTek, LLC
Apple and ImberaTek have filed a joint motion to terminate the IPR over U.S. Patent 7,732,909. The parties cite a settlement agreement and PTAB good‑cause precedent to end the pre‑institution proceeding.
Dead Air Silencers et al.vsJarvis Arms LLC
Dead Air Silencers has filed an IPR seeking cancellation of ten claims of Jarvis Arms’ firearm suppressor patent, arguing that the claimed features were already known in the art. The petition relies on eight obviousness grounds citing Belykov, Noonan, Muceus, Slack and Sclafani. The Board has not yet ruled.
Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. et al.vsMaxell, LTD.
Maxell’s preliminary response argues Samsung’s IPR petition fails because the cited prior art (Shindo, Sasaki, Futa, McClellan) does not disclose the patented association‑information features. The patent owner seeks denial of institution.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al.vsW&Wsens Devices Inc.
Samsung’s request for Director Review of the PTAB’s denial to institute an IPR against W&Wsens’s patent was rejected. The Board affirmed discretionary denial, citing Fintiv factors and settled expectations.
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.