Short Summary
Samsung and Headwater have filed a joint motion to keep their settlement agreement confidential under 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and related regulations, seeking Board approval to seal the document.
Detailed Summary
In IPR2024-01468 concerning U.S. Patent No. 9,094,868, Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. and patent owner Headwater Partners II LLC jointly moved to terminate the proceeding and requested that the settlement agreement be treated as business confidential information. Citing 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c), they asked the Board to keep the agreement separate from the public patent file and limit its availability to government agencies or parties demonstrating good cause. The motion includes signatures from counsel at Holland & Knight and Russ, August & Kabat and was served on November 4, 2025.
Practitioner Note
This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in Ericsson Inc et al. vs Headwater Partners II LLC is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd.vsSamsung Display Co., Ltd.
BOE Technology and Samsung Display have settled all disputes over U.S. Patent 11,626,066 and jointly moved to terminate the inter partes review. The motion cites compliance with 35 U.S.C. §317 and argues that no merits have been decided.
Microsoft CorporationvsEyesMatch Ltd.
Microsoft and EyesMatch filed a joint request to keep their settlement agreement confidential, invoking federal statutes. The Board had previously authorized the filing, and the parties seek limited disclosure only to government agencies or parties with good cause.
Zhuhai CosMX Battery Co., Ltd.vsNingde Amperex Technology Ltd.
Zhuhai CosMX Battery seeks Director Review after the PTAB denied institution of an IPR challenging Ningde Amperex's lithium‑ion battery separator patent. The petitioner argues the panel misapplied inherency law, treated an apparatus claim as a method step, and used an improper evidentiary standard.
Jumio CorporationvsFaceTec, Inc.
The PTAB denied Jumio Corp.’s request for Director Review of the institution decisions in four IPRs, including the case involving FaceTec’s patent 11,693,938. The denial leaves the institution decisions unchanged.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al.vsHannibal IP LLC
Samsung and Hannibal IP entered a settlement that led to the joint termination of IPR2025-01187 concerning U.S. Patent 11,057,896. The Board granted the motion and ordered the settlement agreement to be kept confidential.
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.