Short Summary
Yangtze Memory Technologies petitions the PTAB to invalidate three claims of Micron's 3D NAND patent, citing anticipation by Lung and obviousness over Park, Fukuzumi, and Mokhlesi. The petitioner argues discretionary denial does not apply and seeks cancellation of claims 8, 13, and 21.
Detailed Summary
In IPR2025-00499, Yangtze Memory Technologies Company, Ltd. challenges U.S. Patent 8,803,214 owned by Micron Technology, Inc., asserting that claims 8, 13, and 21 are anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2011/0286283 (Lung) under pre‑AIA 35 U.S.C. §102(e) and rendered obvious by Lung under §103. Additional obviousness grounds are presented for the same claims in view of the combination of Park with Mokhlesi and Fukuzumi with Mokhlesi, also under §103. The petition argues that the Board should not exercise discretionary denial under §§ 325(d) and 314(a) and requests that the Board cancel the challenged claims. No institution decision has been made, and the proceeding remains at the petition stage.
Practitioner Note
This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in Yangtze Memory Technologies Company, Ltd. et al. vs Micron Technology, Inc. et al. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
Abbott Laboratories et al.vsMIRACOR MEDICAL SA
Miracor Medical seeks Director Review to deny Abbott’s institution of IPR 2025‑00115, arguing procedural deficiencies, lack of particularity, improper claim constructions, and word‑count violations. The Board had previously instituted the IPR on numerous cardiac‑pump claims.
CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. et al.vsInfoExpress Inc.
Cisco and Fortinet have filed a Request for Director Review to overturn a PTAB decision that denied institution of an IPR on their network‑security patent. They contend the Board misinterpreted the Krantz reference, overlooking device‑level audit data. The petition seeks vacatur of the decision and institution of the review.
Caihong Display Devices Co., Ltd.vsCorning Incorporated
The USPTO Board denied the institution of IPR proceedings initiated by Caihong Display Devices against Corning regarding patent 8627684.
Meta Platforms, Inc.vsDialect, LLC
Meta Platforms petitions the PTAB to invalidate Dialect’s 9,263,039 patent covering multimodal speech processing, asserting that the claims are obvious over prior patents Maes and Ross.
Apple Inc. et al.vsSiOnyx, LLC
Apple and Sony have filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate all 18 claims of SiOnyx’s image‑sensor patent, alleging obviousness over multiple prior‑art references. The petition argues no discretionary denial applies and urges the Board to institute review.
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.