Short Summary
Microsoft and Dialect reached a settlement that resolves disputes over patent 8,620,659 and other patents, leading to a joint motion to terminate the inter partes review before the Board makes an institution decision.
Detailed Summary
In IPR2025-01352 concerning U.S. Patent No. 8,620,659, Microsoft Corporation and patent owner Dialect, LLC jointly filed a motion to terminate the inter partes review prior to any institution decision. The parties disclosed that they had entered into a settlement agreement on November 30, 2025, resolving all outstanding disputes over multiple patents, including the '659 patent. Citing public policy favoring settlement under 35 U.S.C. § 317 and the early stage of the proceeding, they requested the Board to dismiss the case without prejudice. The Board was asked to treat the settlement agreement as confidential business information. The motion reflects a strategic decision to avoid further litigation and potential estoppel.
Practitioner Note
This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in Microsoft Corporation vs Dialect, 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 Electronics and ASUS Technology Licensing have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 10,986,585 and jointly moved to terminate the inter partes review. The Board has not yet decided the merits, and public policy supports termination after settlement.
Apple Inc.vs--
Apple moved to terminate IPR2025-00600 after a reexamination cancelled all claims of the 10,698,989 patent. The Board granted the motion, ending the proceeding before institution.
iRhythm, Inc.vsWelch Allyn, Inc. et al.
iRhythm has filed a petition for inter partes review of Welch Allyn’s U.S. Patent 10,159,422 covering a wearable ECG sensor. The challenger asserts that the claims are obvious over three prior‑art references—Matsumura, Jensen, and Ozguz—and asks the PTAB to cancel them.
Zhuhai CosMX Battery Co., Ltd.vsNingde Amperex Technology Ltd.
Zhuhai CosMX Battery challenges Ningde Amperex’s ’910 battery electrolyte patent, asserting that 21 claims are obvious over a suite of Chinese and foreign prior‑art references. The petition seeks institution of an IPR under § 103, arguing the claims add no inventive contribution. The Board has yet to decide on institution.
Alpinestars S.p.A et al.vsDainese S.p.A.
Alpinestars and Dainese have executed a settlement that ends all pending cross‑border patent disputes over airbag technology for motorcyclists. The agreement includes dismissal of lawsuits, withdrawal of oppositions, and a mutual non‑challenge pledge.
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.