Ericsson Inc. et al. v. Pegasus Wireless Innovation LLC

IPR2025-00083

Ericsson, Nokia, Google and other carriers have moved to partially terminate an IPR over Pegasus’s 5G carrier‑aggregation patent after executing binding term sheets with the patent owner and dismissing related district‑court cases.

Jurisdiction
US PTAB
Case Number
IPR2025-00083
Decision Date
15 November 2024
Filing Date
15 November 2024

Detailed Summary

In IPR2025‑00083 concerning U.S. Patent No. 10,638,463, a group of major telecom operators—including Ericsson, Nokia, Google, AT&T, Verizon, and T‑Mobile—jointly filed a motion to partially terminate the inter‑ partes review as to AT&T, Verizon, and T‑Mobile. The motion is predicated on binding term sheets executed between each carrier, KT Corporation, and Pegasus Wireless Innovation LLC, which resolve all outstanding disputes and have already led to dismissals of the corresponding district‑court infringement actions. Citing 35 U.S.C. §317(a) and the Patent Trial Practice Guide, the parties argue that the Board should honor the settlement and terminate the proceeding before any merits are decided, preserving resources and avoiding prejudice. Non‑moving petitioners have not objected, supporting the request for partial termination.

Practitioner Note

This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in Ericsson Inc. et al. vs Pegasus Wireless Innovation LLC is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.

Related Cases

patentIPR2025-01431

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al.vsNetlist, Inc.

The PTAB held that most of the claims of Netlist’s ’907 memory‑module patent were obvious over the Ellsberry reference (and its combinations), cancelling 63 of 65 challenged claims. Claims 40 and 41 survived. Samsung emerged as the prevailing challenger.

patentIPR2025-01010

Google LLCvsSandpiper CDN, LLC

The Director denied Google LLC's request for review of the institution decisions in four IPRs, including the case involving Sandpiper CDN's patent 10,057,322. The institution decisions therefore remain in effect.

patentIPR2025-00833

Belden Inc. et al.vsCommScope, Inc. of North Carolina

The USPTO Director denied Belden's request for review of the earlier decision denying institution of CommScope's patent 9,266,697. The denial upholds the original institution refusal.

patentIPR2024-00786

Toyota Motor Corp. et al.vsEmerging Automotive LLC

Toyota Motor Corp. successfully petitioned to challenge Emerging Automotive LLC's patent (9171268) in a PTAB proceeding, leading to an institution decision. The challenges focus on claims related to vehicle profile management and cloud services under grounds of anticipation (102) and obviousness (103).

patentIPR2024-01444

Aktana, IncvsVeeva Systems Inc.

Aktana and Veeva have settled all disputes over U.S. Patent 9,391,937 and jointly moved to terminate the pending inter partes review. The Board has not yet ruled on institution or merits, and the parties seek to keep the settlement confidential.

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