Short Summary
The PTAB granted institution for IPR2026-00069, allowing GE Healthcare Ltd. to challenge claims in patent 11938201 held by The Johns Hopkins University.
Detailed Summary
In this Institution Decision, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) granted institution for Inter Partes Review proceeding IPR2026-00069. After reviewing non-discretionary considerations, the Board found that the petitioner, GE Healthcare Ltd., demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on at least one claim challenged in the petition, thereby allowing the trial to proceed.
Practitioner Note
This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in GE Healthcare Ltd. et al. vs The Johns Hopkins University et al. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
MWE Investments, LLC et al.vsChampion Power Equipment, Inc.
MWE Investments, Harbor Freight and Generac have filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of Champion Power Equipment’s dual‑fuel lockout switch patent, arguing that the claims are obvious or anticipated over multiple prior‑art references and that key claim terms lack proper structure.
Neurocrine Biosciences, Inc.vsSpruce Biosciences, Inc.
Neurocrine Biosciences has filed a PTAB post‑grant review petition seeking to invalidate Spruce Biosciences’ 11,007,201 patent covering CRF1 receptor antagonists for congenital adrenal hyperplasia. The petition alleges anticipation, obviousness, and lack of written description. Discretionary denial is contested.
Apple Inc.vsImberaTek, LLC
Apple and ImberaTek settled their disputes covering nine patents, leading the PTAB to terminate all related IPRs before institution. The settlement agreement was ordered to be kept confidential.
Klein Tools, Inc.vsMilwaukee Electric Tool Corporation et al.
Milwaukee Electric Tool Corp. argues that Klein Tools' IPR petition fails on obviousness grounds, citing cumulative prior art and lack of motivation, and seeks denial of institution.
International Business Machines CorporationvsSecurity First Innovations, LLC
IBM has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of all 27 claims of Security First Innovations’ U.S. Patent 8,271,802, asserting obviousness over multiple prior‑art references and lack of novelty. The petition outlines seven grounds covering the full claim set.
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.