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
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al.vsASUS Technology Licensing Inc.
Samsung and Asus filed a joint request to have their IPR settlement materials treated as business confidential information under 35 U.S.C. § 317(b). The motion seeks to keep the settlement separate from the public file and limit access to government agencies or parties with good cause.
Henri Daussi, LLCvsECNA, LLC et al.
Henri Daussi, LLC filed an unopposed motion to withdraw its IPR petition after reaching a settlement with patent owner ECNA, LLC. The Board has not yet issued an institution decision, and the parties seek termination of the proceeding.
LG Energy Solution, Ltd.vsMolecular Rebar Design, LLC
The PTAB affirmed all claims of LG Energy Solution’s lithium‑ion battery patent after finding the challenger’s obviousness arguments unsupported. The Board emphasized that Ohata’s masterbatch embeds carbon nanotubes, preventing the required ionic attachment, and rejected the petitioner’s speculation about resin removal.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al.vsOuraring, Inc. et al.
The PTAB has instituted the IPR against Ouraring, Inc. et al., finding a reasonable likelihood of prevailing for Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. on multiple grounds of obviousness (103). The institution decision targets 17 claims related to smart rings and biometric monitoring technology.
Multi-Color CorporationvsBrook & Whittle Ltd.
Multi-Color Corp. has filed a post‑grant review petition seeking cancellation of Brook & Whittle’s recyclable shrink‑label patent, alleging anticipation, obviousness, and indefiniteness.
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.