VusionGroup SA et al. v. Hanshow Technology Co., Ltd.

IPR2024-00963

VusionGroup and Hanshow Technology jointly moved to end IPR 2024‑00963 and asked the PTAB to keep their final settlement agreement confidential under statutory authority.

Jurisdiction
US PTAB
Case Number
IPR2024-00963
Decision Date
6 March 2024
Filing Date
6 March 2024

Detailed Summary

In IPR2024‑00963 concerning U.S. Patent No. 10,701,321, challenger VusionGroup SA and patent owner Hanshow Technology Co., Ltd. entered into a final settlement agreement. On May 30, 2025, the parties jointly filed a request to terminate the proceeding and to have the settlement agreement treated as business‑confidential information pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §317(b) and 37 C.F.R. §42.74(c). They seek to keep the agreement separate from the public patent file and request Board notification of any production requests.

Practitioner Note

This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in VusionGroup SA et al. vs Hanshow Technology Co., Ltd. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.

Related Cases

patentIPR2024-01406

Shenzhen Kangvape Technology Co., Ltd.vsRAI Strategic Holdings, Inc. et al.

The PTAB denied institution of an IPR challenge against a vaporizing smoking article patent, citing the existence and advanced stage of a parallel ITC investigation.

patentIPR2025-00034

Micron Technology, Inc. et al.vsYangtze Memory Technologies Company, Ltd.

Micron Technology successfully petitioned to challenge key claims in a semiconductor memory patent held by Yangtze Memory Technologies, leading to institution at the PTAB. The Board focused on obviousness (103) over Nakajima, balancing technical merits with parallel litigation factors.

patentIPR2024-01203

Hanwha Solutions CorporationvsMaxeon Solar Pte. Ltd.

The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding that claims 1-11 are unpatentable over combinations of prior art references (Froitzheim, Gan, Sheats). Claim 12 was not shown to be unpatentable. The Board found the Petitioner met its burden regarding reasonable expectation of success for several claims.

patentIPR2024-01175

AMAZON.COM, INC. et al.vsNokia Technologies Oy

Amazon and Nokia settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 6,856,701 B2. The Board granted a joint motion to terminate the proceeding and partially approved confidentiality for the settlement documents.

patentIPR2024-01459

STARA S.A.-INDÚSTRIA DE IMPLEMENTOS AGRÍCOLASvsAGCO Corporation

STARA has requested Director Review of IPR2024-01459 against AGCO's patent 11,665,989. The patent owner may respond within five business days, limited to five pages and without new evidence.

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