Short Summary
EndyMed Medical Ltd. and EndyMed Medical Inc. jointly moved to terminate IPR2024-00384 after reaching a settlement with patent owner Serendia, LLC. The Board was asked to end the proceeding before any oral hearing or final decision.
Detailed Summary
In IPR2024-00384 concerning U.S. Patent No. 9,320,536, the petitioners EndyMed Medical Ltd. and EndyMed Medical Inc. and the patent owner Serendia, LLC have entered into a settlement that resolves all disputes over the patent. Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §317 and related regulations, the parties filed a joint motion requesting the PTAB to terminate the inter partes review in its entirety. The motion notes that no oral hearing has been held and no final written decision issued, and cites precedent where the Board routinely grants such termination requests. The Board is thus asked to dismiss the proceeding.
Practitioner Note
This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in Jeisys Medical Inc. et al. vs Serendia, LLC is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
Databricks, Inc.vsByteWeavr LLC
Databricks and ByteWeavr have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 6,839,733 and jointly moved to terminate the pending IPR. The motion cites the early stage of the proceeding and lack of opposition as grounds for termination.
Sony CorporationvsOptimum Imaging Technologies LLC
Sony and Optimum Imaging Technologies have reached a settlement, jointly requesting termination of the IPR concerning patent 8,451,339. The Board is asked to end the proceeding under statutory authority.
PacifiCorp et al.vsMES, Inc.
MidAmerican Energy Company and BirchTech Corp. have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 10,926,218 and filed a joint motion to terminate the inter partes review. The motion cites statutory authority and public‑policy reasons favoring settlement before any merits decision.
Amazon.com, Inc. et al.vsAlmondNet, Inc.
The PTAB held that all of the claims challenged by Amazon in IPR2022‑01436 are unpatentable, finding them obvious over a combination of prior‑art references covering user profiling and ad targeting.
Apple Inc.vsHBCU Messaging US LP
Apple’s request to overturn a PTAB discretionary denial was rejected. The Board affirmed the Director’s decision to refer the matter to the district court, leaving HBCU Messaging’s patent intact.
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.