Google LLC v. Secure Communication Technologies, LLC

IPR2025-01182

Google’s IPR against a proximity‑based wireless patent resulted in the Board finding 20 of 22 challenged claims unpatentable, leaving only claims 37 and 43 intact.

Jurisdiction
US PTAB
Case Number
IPR2025-01182
Judge(s)
Brian J. McNamara, Charles J. Boudreau, Sean P. O’Hanlon
Filing Date
7 February 2025

Practitioner Note

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

Related Cases

patentIPR2026-00099

Google LLCvsSecure Communication Technologies, LLC

Google’s IPR against Secure Communication Technologies’ proximity‑based data‑exchange patent resulted in a Final Written Decision finding all challenged claims unpatentable, based on anticipation and obviousness over the Eagle reference and, for three claims, the combination of Eagle with Mgrdechian.

patentIPR2025-00366

Google LLC et al.vsMullen Industries LLC

Google and Samsung have petitioned the PTAB to invalidate claims 15‑41 of Mullen Industries’ ’117 patent covering wireless device location sharing, citing multiple prior‑art combinations under §103.

patentIPR2024-01266

3Shape A/S et al.vsMedit Corporation et al.

3Shape and Medit have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 9,262,864, filing a joint motion to terminate the pending inter partes review. The Board has not yet decided on institution, and the parties seek dismissal to preserve resources.

patentIPR2025-00998

Google LLCvsAdvanced Coding Technologies LLC

Google has filed a Director Review request challenging the PTAB’s denial of institution for its IPR against Advanced Coding Technologies’ patent 8,090,025, arguing procedural errors and improper discretionary denial.

patentIPR2024-00433

Comcast Corporation et al.vsEntropic Communications LLC

Comcast Cable Communications filed an IPR challenging the validity of Entropic's wideband receiver system patent (9210362). The petitioner argues that all 20 claims are obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103, relying on combinations of prior art references like Petrovic and Eidson.

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