Short Summary
IKEA Supply AG and Everlight Electronics jointly filed a motion to have their settlement agreement treated as business confidential information under 35 U.S.C. §317(b) in IPR2024-00987.
Detailed Summary
In IPR2024-00987 concerning U.S. Patent No. 9,905,742, petitioner IKEA Supply AG and patent owner Everlight Electronics Co., Ltd. submitted a joint request to the PTAB to treat their settlement agreement as business confidential information. Citing 35 U.S.C. §317(b) and relevant CFR provisions, they argue the agreement contains confidential terms that resolve their dispute and should be kept separate from the patent file. The request was filed concurrently with the agreement, satisfying the Board’s timeliness requirements, and seeks the Board’s approval for confidential treatment.
Practitioner Note
This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in IKEA Supply AG et al. vs Everlight Electronics Co., Ltd. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
Skechers U.S.A., Inc.vsNike, Inc.
Skechers petitions the PTAB Director to overturn a denial of institution for Nike’s shoe‑upper patent, arguing the Board misapplied §325(d) to foreign‑language references and ignored prior PTAB findings. The request highlights issues with unintelligible translations and contradictory precedent.
Topsoe, Inc. et al.vsCASALE SA
The PTAB granted institution for the IPR involving Topsoe and CASALE regarding patent 11286168. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on at least one claim.
Tommy John, Inc.vsPakage Apparel, Inc.
The PTAB found that the challenged claims (1-13, 15, 16) were unpatentable based on obviousness over combinations of prior art references. The Board accepted Petitioner's argument that Kitsch satisfied key limitations like 'stretch panel,' and broadly construed material requirements to favor the petitioner.
Microsoft CorporationvsSandpiper CDN, LLC
Microsoft seeks Director Review of a PTAB institution decision that unusually instituted review of Sandpiper's expired CDN patent. The brief argues the Board misapplied settled‑expectations policy and erred in fact finding.
Apple Inc.vsApex Beam Technologies LLC
Apple Inc. successfully petitioned to institute IPR against Apex Beam Technologies LLC's patent 10,944,527, arguing the claims are obvious over prior art related to massive MIMO and beamforming.
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.