Short Summary
Light & Wonder has filed an IPR petition challenging Evolution Malta’s ’024 roulette‑payout patent, asserting anticipation and obviousness over Kido, Yee, and Baron prior art.
Detailed Summary
In a petition for inter‑partes review, Light & Wonder, Inc. seeks cancellation of claims 1‑5, 7‑12, 14‑18, and 20 of U.S. Patent No. 10,629,024, which covers a roulette‑based wagering system that randomly selects positions for increased payouts. The challenger contends that the claimed inventions are fully disclosed or rendered obvious by three earlier references—Kido (2008), Yee (2017), and Baron (2016)—covering the same random‑selection mechanics, sensor‑based spin detection, and tiered payout structures. The petition details how each claim element maps onto the prior art and argues that the patent lacks any inventive contribution, invoking §§102 and 103 for unpatentability.
Practitioner Note
This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in Light & Wonder, Inc. et al. vs Evolution Malta Limited is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
DELL INC. et al.vsAX Wireless, LLC et al.
Dell and AX Wireless have jointly moved to terminate the IPR over patent 11,212,146 after reaching a settlement. The motion cites statutory authority for termination and notes that the Board has not yet decided the merits.
Berkshire Hathaway Energy Company et al.vsMES, Inc.
The PTAB denied a Patent Owner's request for Director Review, instead remanding the IPR cases to allow discovery on complex real parties in interest (RPI) and privity issues related to concurrent district court litigation.
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., et al.vsSinotechnix LLC
Samsung and Sinotechnix have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 7,951,626 and jointly moved to terminate the inter partes review, requesting that the settlement be kept confidential. The Board has not yet ruled on institution, so the motion is pending.
Target CorporationvsHEADWATER RESEARCH LLC
Samsung has filed an IPR petition challenging Headwater’s ’192 MMS server patent, asserting that all challenged claims are obvious over a suite of prior‑art references. The petition seeks institution and argues against discretionary denial.
Dead Air Silencers et al.vsJarvis Arms LLC
Dead Air Silencers has filed an IPR seeking cancellation of ten claims of Jarvis Arms’ firearm suppressor patent, arguing that the claimed features were already known in the art. The petition relies on eight obviousness grounds citing Belykov, Noonan, Muceus, Slack and Sclafani. The Board has not yet ruled.
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.