Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v. W&Wsens Devices Inc.

PGR2025-00082

The PTAB granted institution for PGR2025-00082 after reviewing discretionary and non-discretionary considerations. The petitioner successfully demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of prevailing or that the challenged claims are unpatentable.

Jurisdiction
US PTAB
Case Number
PGR2025-00082
Judge(s)
JOHN A. SQUIRES
Decision Date
28 August 2025

Detailed Summary

This Institution Decision confirms that Post-Grant Review (PGR) proceeding PGR2025-00082 will proceed to merits review. Following a thorough review of discretionary and non-discretionary considerations, the Board found that the petitioner met the required standard by showing either a reasonable likelihood of prevailing or that at least one challenged claim is more likely than not unpatentable. The document also notes several other IPRs where institution was denied.

Practitioner Note

This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. vs W&Wsens Devices Inc. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.

Related Cases

patentIPR2025-00728

Imperative Care, Inc.vsInari Medical, Inc. et al.

The PTAB has instituted an inter partes review of Inari Medical’s ’291 hemostasis valve patent after finding Imperative Care’s petition shows a reasonable likelihood of success. All 16 challenged claims are now under review.

patentIPR2025-00478

Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. et al.vsConcurrent Ventures, LLC et al.

Patent owners seek rehearing to overturn the PTAB's denial of discretionary denial, arguing that a June 2026 trial in the parallel district court precedes the PTAB's final decision deadline, invoking Fintiv factors. They reference a prior Director decision in a related IPR that denied institution under similar circumstances.

patentIPR2025-00722

Zhuhai CosMX Battery Co., Ltd.vsNingde Amperex Technology Ltd.

The PTAB denied Zhuhai CosMX Battery’s petition to invalidate Ningde Amperex’s 2020 electrolyte patent, finding no reasonable likelihood of success. The Board held that the prior art did not adequately disclose all claim elements, especially the propyl propionate ratio.

patentIPR2024-01131

BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd.vsOptronic Sciences LLC

The PTAB denied Optronic Sciences’ request to revisit the institution of its IPR against BOE Technology Group, finding no extraordinary circumstances and that the new Director’s guidance did not apply.

patentIPR2025-00566

Amazon.com, Inc. et al.vsVirtaMove, Corp.

Amazon has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of 11 claims of VirtaMove’s 7,519,814 patent covering container virtualization. The petition argues obviousness over prior‑art systems such as Osman, Tucker, Bandhole and Gélinas and asserts no discretionary denial grounds.

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