Short Summary
The PTAB denied Micron's IPR petition against Yangtze Memory because the patent owner had successfully filed a statutory disclaimer covering all challenged claims related to 3D memory devices.
Detailed Summary
Micron Technology, Inc. petitioned for an Inter Partes Review (IPR) of U.S. Patent No. 10,886,291, challenging several claims related to joint opening structures in 3D memory devices. However, the Board denied institution because Yangtze Memory Technologies Company, Ltd., the patent owner, had filed a statutory disclaimer under 35 U.S.C. § 253(a). The Board confirmed that this disclaimer was properly recorded on May 9, 2025, thus precluding any review of those claims.
Practitioner Note
This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in Micron Technology, Inc. et al. vs Yangtze Memory Technologies Company, Ltd. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
ADC Solutions Auto LLC et al.vsThe Noco Company
The Noco Company seeks Director Review of the PTAB’s decision that found eight of its USB‑charging jump‑starter claims unpatentable, arguing the Board misapplied obviousness analysis and ignored key evidence.
Geotab Inc. et al.vsFractus, S.A.
The USPTO Director denied Geotab’s request for review of the institution decisions in IPR2025‑01026 (and related IPR2025‑01027), leaving the institution of the patents intact.
Alvotech USA Inc. et al.vsRegeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Alvotech petitions the PTAB to invalidate Regeneron’s ’036 patent covering high‑dose aflibercept eye‑treatment formulations, alleging obviousness and lack of written description. The petition relies on multiple Regeneron disclosures and external prior art. The Board has yet to rule.
Comcast Corporation et al.vsEntropic Communications LLC
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding claims 1, 3, and 4 of the patent obvious over combinations of Afshary and Mirfakhraei. Claim 2 was not found obvious. The Board adopted Petitioner's claim construction for means-plus-function limitations, defining structures as processors or specific signal processing components.
Apple Inc.vsHBCU MESSAGING US LP
Apple has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate all 30 claims of U.S. Patent No. 11,991,600, which covers methods for selecting message bearers on mobile devices. The petition relies on obviousness grounds under 35 U.S.C. §103, combining prior art from Horvath, Tsampalis, Kansal, and Dorenbosch. No claim constructions or institution decision are present at this stage.
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.