Short Summary
Berkshire Hathaway Energy and its subsidiaries filed a joint motion with the PTAB to keep their settlement agreement with BirchTech Corp. confidential and to terminate the IPR proceeding for MidAmerican Energy.
Detailed Summary
In IPR2025-00274, Berkshire Hathaway Energy Company, MidAmerican Energy Company, and Pacificorp jointly moved to terminate the inter partes review of U.S. Patent No. 10,343,114 with respect to MidAmerican Energy, citing a settlement with patent owner BirchTech Corp. (formerly Midwest Energy Emissions Corp.). The parties submitted a request that the settlement agreement be treated as business confidential information under 35 U.S.C. §317(b) and 37 C.F.R. §42.74(c), arguing that the terms are highly confidential commercial information. They seek to keep the agreement separate from the public patent file and limit its disclosure to government agencies or parties demonstrating good cause.
Practitioner Note
This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in Berkshire Hathaway Energy Company et al. vs MES, Inc. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
C.R. Bard, Inc. et al.vsMedline Industries, LP
C.R. Bard and Medline have jointly filed a motion asking the PTAB to keep their settlement agreement confidential under 35 U.S.C. § 317(b). The request seeks to separate the agreement from the patent file and limit disclosure to federal agencies only.
Micron Technology, Inc. et al.vsYangtze Memory Technologies Company, Ltd.
Yangtze Memory Technologies seeks Director Review of the PTAB’s decision to institute an IPR against Micron’s 3D NAND patent, arguing the Board relied on unsupported expert testimony and failed to deny institution despite weak merits.
Cambridge Industries USA Inc. et al.vsApplied Optoelectronics, Inc.
The USPTO denied Cambridge Industries' request for Director Review of the institution denial in IPR2025-00433, leaving the original denial in place.
Google LLCvsSandpiper CDN, LLC
Google has petitioned the PTAB to invalidate all 20 claims of Sandpiper CDN’s CDN patent, arguing anticipation by Newton-471 and obviousness over Dilley, Pai, and Wang. The petition stresses favorable institution factors and argues against discretionary denial.
Google LLC et al.vsMullen Industries LLC
The Director denied requests for review in multiple IPR proceedings involving Google and Mullen Industries. This decision affirms the prior denial of institution, meaning trial will not proceed on these patents.
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.