Applied Concepts Inc. v. Kustom Signals Inc.

IPR2024-00829

Applied Concepts and Kustom Signals have entered a settlement that resolves all disputes over U.S. Patent No. 11,194,039, and they have jointly moved to terminate the pending IPR.

Jurisdiction
US PTAB
Case Number
IPR2024-00829
Decision Date
22 April 2024
Filing Date
22 April 2024

Detailed Summary

In IPR2024-00829 concerning U.S. Patent No. 11,194,039, the petitioner, Applied Concepts Inc., and the patent owner, Kustom Signals Inc., filed a joint motion to terminate the inter partes review. The parties report that they have reached a comprehensive settlement that resolves all outstanding issues, including a related district‑court case. Citing 35 U.S.C. §317(a) and Board policy favoring settlement, they request that the PTAB dismiss the proceeding before any merits are decided.

Practitioner Note

This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in Applied Concepts Inc. vs Kustom Signals Inc. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.

Related Cases

patentIPR2024-01020

Google LLCvsKove IO, Inc.

Google and Kove IO settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 7,814,170 before the Board could institute a trial. The parties filed a joint motion to terminate, which the PTAB granted, dismissing the petitions.

patentIPR2025-00876

Google LLCvsCellular South Inc

The PTAB notified the parties that Director Review requests have been received for IPR2025-00875 and IPR2025-00876, setting a 15‑page limit and a five‑business‑day deadline for the Patent Owner’s response, with no new evidence allowed.

patentIPR2025-00541

Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. et al.vsMobile Data Technologies LLC

Samsung has filed a petition for Director Review after the PTAB denied institution of an IPR against Mobile Data Technologies’ patent 9,922,348. The petition contends the denial was an abuse of discretion, citing unfounded settled‑expectations claims, factual errors, and examiner error. It seeks reversal and institution of the review.

patentIPR2025-01457

GENERAC POWER SYSTEMS, INC. et al.vsChampion Power Equipment, Inc.

Harbor Freight Tools and Champion Power Equipment filed a joint request asking the PTAB to keep their settlement agreement confidential and separate from the patent file.

patentIPR2025-01169

Aesthetic Management Partners, LLC et al.vsHydraFacial LLC

Aesthetic Management Partners has petitioned the PTAB for Inter Partes Review of HydraFacial’s 9,550,052 microdermabrasion patent, asserting that all 17 claims are obvious over a combination of prior‑art devices.

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