Apple Inc. v. Apex Beam Technologies LLC

IPR2025-00896

Apple has filed an IPR petition challenging Apex Beam’s 2021 LTE beam‑switching patent. The petition relies on the Chen patent combined with 3GPP standards and the Dahlman textbook to argue obviousness of all twelve claims under §103.

Jurisdiction
US PTAB
Case Number
IPR2025-00896
Decision Date
28 April 2025
Filing Date
28 April 2025

Detailed Summary

In IPR2025-00896, Apple Inc. petitions the PTAB to invalidate claims 1‑12 of U.S. Patent No. 10,912,081, which cover methods and devices for wireless communication involving beam switching between a wide and narrow antenna beam within a time slot. Apple asserts that the Chen patent (U.S. Pat. No. 11,039,470) together with publicly available 3GPP Release 14 specifications, or alternatively with the Dahlman textbook on LTE, disclose every limitation of the challenged claims, rendering them obvious under 35 U.S.C. §103. The petition includes detailed claim charts, expert declaration, and references to prior IPR history, and requests that the Board institute review and cancel the claims.

Practitioner Note

This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in Apple Inc. vs Apex Beam Technologies LLC is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.

Related Cases

patentIPR2025-01096

Amazon.com, Inc. et al.vsSoundClear Technologies LLC et al.

Amazon’s request for Director Review of the PTAB’s discretionary denial of institution was rejected. The Board affirmed that the “settled expectations” standard is a lawful discretionary factor and that Amazon’s APA and due‑process arguments fail.

patentIPR2024-01233

Dyson Technology Limited et al.vsOmachron Intellectual Property Inc. et al.

Dyson and Omachron have settled the IPR over U.S. Patent 9,301,666 and jointly moved to terminate the proceeding, requesting the settlement be kept confidential.

patentIPR2025-01387

Volex plcvsCREDO TECHNOLOGY GROUP LTD.

Volex plc and Credo Technology Group Ltd. have settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 11,032,111 and jointly request that the settlement agreement be kept confidential and the proceeding terminated.

patentIPR2025-01571

Apple Inc. et al.vsHEADWATER RESEARCH LLC

Apple, Amazon.com Services and AWS have filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate 30 claims of Headwater Research’s ’571 patent covering secure device provisioning over wireless networks. They argue the claims are obvious over prior‑art systems from Chia, Cunningham and others.

patentIPR2026-00304

Google LLCvs--

Google has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate claims 1‑16 of U.S. Patent 8,438,120, which covers hyper‑parameter optimization for machine‑learning classifiers. The petition relies on five prior‑art references to argue anticipation and obviousness, and asks the PTAB to institute the trial.

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