Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v. NL Giken Inc.

IPR2025-00050

Amazon successfully challenged NL Giken's patent (US 10880592) in the PTAB, leading to institution on claims 1-3 and 5. The petitioner argued that prior art references Walker and Chang rendered the claims obvious in the context of digital broadcasting systems.

Jurisdiction
US PTAB
Case Number
IPR2025-00050
Judge(s)
MICHELLE N. WORMMEESTER, KEVIN C. TROCK, IFTIKHAR AHMED
Decision Date
25 November 2024

Detailed Summary

Amazon.com, Inc. et al. successfully petitioned for institution against NL Giken Inc.'s patent (US 10880592) before the PTAB. The petitioner asserted that claims 1, 2, 3, and 5 were obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over prior art references Walker and Chang. Despite considerations of related litigation, the Board found sufficient evidence supporting the likelihood of prevailing on at least one claim (Claim 1) based on the preliminary record, resulting in institution for all targeted claims.

Practitioner Note

This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in Amazon.com, Inc. et al. vs NL Giken Inc. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.

Related Cases

patentIPR2025-01181

Google LLCvsSecure Communication Technologies, LLC

Google has filed an IPR petition against Secure Communication’s ’359 patent, asserting that the claims are anticipated by Perttila and obvious in view of Swartz. The petition seeks institution and cancellation of nine claims under §§102 and 103.

patentIPR2024-00734

Cisco Systems, Inc.vsLionra Technologies Limited

The PTAB found claims unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) based on a combination of prior art references (Gai, Yip, Kwan, and Georgiou). The Board determined that an ordinary skilled artisan would have been motivated to combine these teachings to enhance network security and implement advanced ACL functions.

patentIPR2025-01462

ToughBuilt Industries, Inc.vsMeridian International Co. Ltd.

The USPTO Board granted institution for IPR2025-01462 after a merits review, finding the petitioner met the legal threshold. The notice also detailed multiple discretionary and non-discretionary denials across various proceedings.

patentIPR2025-01367

Albany International Corp.vsVoith Patent GmbH

Albany International petitions to invalidate Voith Patent's 2018 paper‑machine fabric patent, asserting that the claimed outside‑placed sheet plies are obvious over multiple prior‑art references.

patentIPR2025-01386

Volex plcvsCREDO TECHNOLOGY GROUP LTD.

Volex PLC and Credo Technology Group settled their IPR disputes covering three patents, including U.S. Patent 11,012,252, and jointly moved to terminate the proceedings. The Board granted the termination and treated the settlement agreement as confidential.

Arctic Invent — IP Strategy

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.

Talk to our patent team →

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.

Strategy Consult

Facing a similar patent matter?

Arctic's litigation team uses precedent data like this to build winning arguments.

Get a Strategy Call