Short Summary
The USPTO Board issued a Notice of Decisions on Institution for several IPRs, denying institution in some cases because the petitioner failed to show a reasonable likelihood of prevailing.
Detailed Summary
This document is a Notice of Decisions on Institution issued by the Office of the Under Secretary of Commerce. It reviews multiple Inter Partes Review (IPR) petitions under 35 U.S.C. § 314(a). The Board denied institution for proceedings IPR2026-00098, IPR2026-00107, IPR2026-00108, and IPR2026-00105 because the petitioner failed to meet the reasonable likelihood of prevailing standard. Conversely, institution was granted in other listed proceedings.
Practitioner Note
This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in Samsara Inc. vs Motive Technologies, Inc. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
Fluidmaster, Inc.vsDanco, Inc. et al.
The PTAB found several independent claims unpatentable over prior art references (Brown and Ho) using grounds of obviousness. The Board adopted a broad construction for 'integrally molded with' as 'molded together as a single structure.'
Zepp Health CorporationvsSlyde Analytics, LLC
Zepp Health and Slyde Analytics have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 9,804,678 and jointly moved to terminate the pending inter partes review. The Board has not yet instituted the proceeding, and the parties cite public‑policy reasons for termination.
Ericsson Inc. et al.vsPegasus Wireless Innovation LLC
The PTAB instituted an IPR challenging Pegasus Wireless Innovation LLC's patent (No. 10638463) for obviousness over prior art including Takeda, Yan, and 3GPP R1-1711853. The petitioner group, comprising major wireless carriers and tech companies, successfully argued that the claimed method is unpatentable in 5G NR resource allocation.
Avanos Medical, Inc.vsStratus Medical, LLC
Stratus Medical’s response to Avanos’s IPR argues that the petition’s obviousness challenges fail because the alleged combination is vague, non‑enabling, and not taught by the prior art, while emphasizing commercial success and industry praise as objective indicia of non‑obviousness.
AMAZON.COM, INC. et al.vsNokia Technologies Oy
Amazon has filed an IPR petition challenging Nokia's '808 patent, asserting that its skip coding mode is obvious over existing prior art references. The challenge focuses on whether combining zero-motion vector (ZMV) and non-zero motion vector (PNZMV) modes constitutes a predictable combination of known techniques in video compression. This dispute involves complex technical arguments regarding standard-setting technologies.
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.