Reolink Innovation Inc. et al. v. THROUGH TEK TECHNOLOGY (SHENZHEN) CO., LTD. et al.

Altice USA, Inc. et al.vsTouchstream Technologies, Inc.

Altice USA filed a petition challenging claims of Touchstream Technologies' patent via an IPR proceeding focused on obviousness (103). The petitioner argues that Claims 1-20 are rendered obvious by combining prior art references such as Aldrey and Mahajan. This petition was subsequently joined into an already instituted IPR, continuing the dispute over media content control technology.

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al.vsOne-E-Way, Inc.

The USPTO granted institution for IPR2025-01540 after reviewing the merits. The petitioner successfully demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on at least one challenged claim.

Google LLCvsMetarail, Inc.

Google LLC has challenged Metarail's deep-linking patents in a PTAB petition, arguing that the claimed invention—a universal variable map for generating deep-linked ads—is obvious. The petitioner asserts that combining prior art references like Belanger and Halevy would have made the automation of mapping fields predictable to a Person Having Ordinary Skill in the Art.

Guangzho EKO Trading Development Co., Ltd. (aka EKO Development Ltd.) et al.vsNine Stars Group (U.S.A.) Inc.

The PTAB instituted IPR proceedings against Nine Stars Group (U.S.A.) Inc., finding a reasonable likelihood that claims 1-24 of patent 10822165 are anticipated or obvious over the prior art reference Wang. The Board accepted Petitioner's arguments regarding functional equivalency, particularly concerning 'automatic driving arrangement' and components like the servo motor.

Vicor CorporationvsDelta Electronics, Inc.

The PTAB denied institution of Vicor Corporation's IPR against Delta Electronics, Inc., finding Petitioner failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of prevailing. The denial hinged on the argument that Petitioner relied on impermissible hindsight bias when combining prior art references for obviousness and anticipation grounds.