Berkshire Hathaway Energy Company et al. v. MES, Inc.

IPR2025-00281

Berkshire Hathaway Energy and its affiliate MidAmerican Energy have moved to keep their settlement with BirchTech Corp. confidential, invoking federal statutes to limit disclosure. The Board has been asked to treat the agreement as business confidential information.

Jurisdiction
US PTAB
Case Number
IPR2025-00281
Filing Date
24 January 2025
Status
ok

Related Cases

patentIPR2025-00452

Eunsung Global Corp.vsHydraFacial LLC et al.

Eunsung Global and HydraFacial settled their inter partes review disputes before the PTAB instituted a trial. The Board granted joint motions to terminate and to keep the settlement agreement confidential, ending the proceedings.

patentIPR2024-00515

Aylo Freesites Ltd et al.vsDISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.

The PTAB denied institution for Aylo Freesites Ltd et al.'s IPR against DISH Technologies L.L.C., citing failure to meet diligence requirements. The Board found that Petitioner failed to demonstrate reasonable diligence in searching for primary prior art, leading to a discretionary denial under General Plastic factors.

patentIPR2024-01282

Cisco Systems, Inc.vsCroga Innovations Ltd.

Cisco and Croga Innovations settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 7,738,368, resulting in a joint motion to terminate the inter partes review. The Board granted the motion, ending the proceeding without a merits decision.

patentIPR2025-00278

Berkshire Hathaway Energy Company et al.vsMES, Inc.

MidAmerican Energy Company and patent owner Birchtech Corp. have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 10,343,114, prompting a joint motion to terminate the IPR as to MidAmerican. The Board is asked to dismiss MidAmerican from the proceeding under 35 U.S.C. §317.

patentIPR2025-00384

Murata Manufacturing Co., Ltd. et al.vsGeorgia Tech Research Corporation

The PTAB upheld the Director’s discretionary denial of institution for Murata’s challenge to Georgia Tech’s ’914 patent, finding no legal error in the decision.

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