Short Summary
Volex plc and Credo Technology Group Ltd. have settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 11,032,111 and jointly request that the settlement agreement be kept confidential and the proceeding terminated.
Detailed Summary
In IPR2025-01387, Volex plc (petitioner) and Credo Technology Group Ltd. (patent owner) filed a joint motion to terminate the inter partes review of U.S. Patent No. 11,032,111 following a settlement that resolves all disputes related to the patent. The parties seek to have the settlement agreement treated as business‑confidential information under 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c), arguing that it contains no material patentability information. The motion includes signatures from counsel Eric S. Lucas for Volex and Jeremy J. Monaldo for Credo, and lists service to the parties’ counsel.
Practitioner Note
This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in Volex plc vs CREDO TECHNOLOGY GROUP LTD. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
Lenovo (United States) Inc. et al.vsHeadwater Research LLC
Court decision.
Canadian Solar Inc. et al.vsMaxeon Solar Pte. Ltd.
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision denying the Petitioner's arguments that claims 10-16 and 19 were unpatentable. The Board found insufficient motivation in the prior art to combine references, particularly regarding optimal dopant concentrations for solar cell fabrication techniques.
Harbor Freight Tools USA, Inc. et al.vsChampion Power Equipment, Inc.
The USPTO Director has initiated a sua sponte review of the Board’s decision to institute an IPR against Champion Power Equipment’s generator patent, addressing claim‑construction disputes raised by Harbor Freight and its co‑petitioners.
HS Hyosung Advanced Materials Corp. et al.vsKolon Industries, Inc.
Hyosung has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate Kolon’s 9,789,731 patent covering hybrid nylon‑aramid tire cords, arguing that all seven claims are obvious over multiple prior‑art references.
SIG Sauer Inc.vsTrue Velocity, Inc.
SIG Sauer has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate all 19 claims of True Velocity’s polymeric ammunition cartridge patent, alleging anticipation and obviousness over multiple prior‑art references. The petition outlines seven statutory grounds under §§ 102 and 103 and requests institution of the review.
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.