Executive Summary
Google, Samsung, and Microsoft petitioned an IPR on EyesMatch's facial‑recognition patent, but Samsung and EyesMatch have now settled and moved to terminate 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 Google LLC et al. vs EyesMatch Ltd. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
PacifiCorp et al.vsMES, Inc.
Petitioners and the patent owner jointly move to have their settlement agreement treated as business confidential information, invoking statutory confidentiality provisions.
Apple Inc.vsImberaTek, LLC
Apple and ImberaTek settled all disputes over nine patents, leading the PTAB to terminate the inter partes review proceedings before any institution decision. The settlement agreement was ordered to be kept confidential.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al.vsHEADWATER RESEARCH LLC
Samsung has filed a Petition for Director Review contesting the USPTO’s denial of institution for IPR 2025‑00483, arguing that the agency’s retroactive policy change violated due process, the APA, and statutory deadlines.
Google LLCvsSecure Communication Technologies, LLC
Google petitions the PTAB to invalidate Secure Communication Technologies' ’913 patent, asserting that prior art Mgrdechian and related references anticipate or render obvious all challenged claims covering wireless device identifier exchange.
Harbor Freight Tools USA, Inc. et al.vsChampion Power Equipment, Inc.
Harbor Freight and Champion Power have settled the IPR over U.S. Patent 11,840,970 covering a dual‑fuel generator. The parties filed a joint request to keep the settlement agreement confidential under 35 U.S.C. §317 and related regulations, and the petitioner seeks to withdraw from the proceeding.
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.