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

AT&T Services, Inc. et al.vsUSTA Technology, LLC

AT&T has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of USTA’s ’720 patent claims, arguing they are obvious over prior‑art MIMO and Wi‑Fi standards. The petition relies on Walton, IEEE 802.11a, Hamabe, and Gubbi references.

Toyota Motor Corp. et al.vsEmerging Automotive LLC

Toyota Motor Corp. petitioned the PTAB to invalidate claims related to user profile and settings transfer systems, arguing that prior art references anticipate or render them obvious. The petition was instituted by the Board, indicating strong initial grounds for challenge.

National Beef Packing Company, LLCvsInstitute for Environmental Health, Inc.

National Beef Packing Company successfully challenged claims 1-30 of the '486 patent in a PTAB Institution Decision, establishing a reasonable likelihood that the methods for pathogen detection are unpatentable. The petitioner relied on prior art references including Rayman and Nagar to demonstrate anticipation and obviousness across multiple grounds.

Comcast Corporation et al.vsEntropic Communications LLC

Comcast Cable Communications (Petitioner) challenges the validity of Entropic's patent, asserting that the claimed method for receiving digitized television signals is anticipated and obvious. The petition relies heavily on prior art references like Zhang, Reisman, Jackson, and Pandey to demonstrate multiple grounds of invalidity under 102 and 103.

FormFactor, Inc.vsTechnoprobe S.p.A.

FormFactor challenges Technoprobe's '885 patent via an IPR, asserting that the claims are anticipated and obvious over prior art references. The petitioner relies heavily on reference Kim, combined with Schmid, Fan, Bross, and a 2016 SWTest Presentation to invalidate multiple claims related to probe card design.