Sandisk Technologies, Inc. et al. v. Polaris PowerLED Technologies, LLC

Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, Ltd.vsAdvanced Integrated Circuit Process LLC

TSMC has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of 27 claims of a dual‑damascene interconnect patent, alleging anticipation and obviousness over multiple prior‑art references. The petition lists detailed grounds for each claim group and requests the Board to institute the review.

Coretronic CorporationvsMaxell, LTD.

Coretronic and Optoma have filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of claims 1‑3 of Maxell’s 7,850,313 projector patent, arguing the claims are obvious over a suite of prior‑art references.

Nuvei Technologies, Inc. et al.vsAutoscribe Corporation

The PTAB denied institution of an IPR petition filed by Nuvei Technologies against Autoscribe Corporation's payment processing patents. The Board found that the petitioner failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on obviousness grounds, specifically regarding negative limitations in tokenization claims.

Micron Technology, Inc. et al.vsYangtze Memory Technologies Company, Ltd.

Micron's request for director review of the PTAB's decision on its 3D NAND patent was denied. The Board affirmed that Micron failed to meet the burden of proving obviousness or motivation to combine prior art references.

Westinghouse Air Brake Technologies Corporation et al.vsRailware, Inc. et al.

Wabtec has filed an IPR petition challenging Railware’s RE 49,115 patent. The petition asserts that claims 20‑36 are obvious over the FRA‑Report combined with secret‑code references. No discretionary denial is alleged.