Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v. Staton Techiya, LLC

IPR2024-01033

Samsung and Staton Techiya settled their IPR over patent 11,750,965 and jointly moved to have the settlement kept confidential and the proceeding terminated.

Jurisdiction
US PTAB
Case Number
IPR2024-01033
Filing Date
18 June 2024
Outcome
terminated or settled

Practitioner Note

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

Related Cases

patentIPR2025-00838

Intel Corporation et al.vsUSTA Technology, LLC

Intel and Lenovo have petitioned the PTAB to invalidate claims 53 and 95 of USTA Technology’s RE47,720 patent, arguing obviousness based on a combination of prior‑art references covering OFDM/MIMO techniques.

patentPGR2025-00016

Kubota North America Corporation et al.vsVermeer Manufacturing Company

Kubota North America Corporation successfully petitioned PGR against Vermeer Manufacturing Company's patent for agricultural machinery, leading to institution on all 11 challenged claims. The Board found sufficient evidence of anticipation and obviousness based on prior art references like KR996.

patentIPR2025-01182

Google LLCvsSecure Communication Technologies, LLC

Google has filed an IPR petition challenging Secure Communication Technologies' U.S. Patent 11,443,344 covering server‑mediated, location‑based transactions between wireless devices. The petition argues anticipation and obviousness over three prior‑art references (Mgrdechian, Swartz, Kulakowski) under §§102 and 103. Google seeks institution of the review.

patentIPR2025-00710

Activision Blizzard, Inc.vsMilestone Entertainment, LLC

Milestone Entertainment filed a sur‑reply in an IPR challenging Activision Blizzard’s claim that claim 8 of U.S. Patent 10,825,294 is unpatentable. The patent owner asserts the petitioner’s evidence fails to show a variable multiplier for virtual currency over time and that new arguments are improper.

patentIPR2025-01264

Imperative Care, Inc.vsInari Medical, Inc. et al.

The PTAB has instituted an inter partes review of Inari Medical’s hemostasis valve patent after finding Imperative Care’s likelihood of success sufficient. All nine claims are now under trial.

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