Short Summary
NormShield and BitSight have jointly moved to terminate IPR2024-01393 following a settlement agreement. The Board has not yet issued an institution decision, and the parties argue that early termination saves costs and resources.
Detailed Summary
In IPR2024-01393 concerning U.S. Patent No. 9,973,524, NormShield Inc. (doing business as Black Kite Inc.) and BitSight Technologies, Inc. have filed a joint motion to terminate the inter partes review. Citing 35 U.S.C. § 317 and related regulations, the parties note that no institution decision has been rendered and that terminating the proceeding at this early stage promotes efficiency and minimizes unnecessary expenses. The motion is supported by a confidential settlement agreement between the parties, and they request that the Board grant the termination while keeping the settlement confidential.
Practitioner Note
This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in NormShield Inc. (d/b/a Black Kite Inc.) vs BitSight Technologies, Inc. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
Apple Inc.vsSmith Interface Technologies, LLC
Apple Inc. successfully secured institution at the PTAB for its challenge against Smith Interface Technologies, LLC's touch screen patent (10936114). The Board found sufficient likelihood of unpatentability based on anticipation and obviousness grounds across multiple claims using four prior art references.
Samsara, Inc.vsMotive Technologies, Inc.
The PTAB denied institution of an IPR proceeding (IPR2026-00034) involving Samsara, Inc. and Motive Technologies, Inc., finding the petitioner failed to meet the standard for likelihood of prevailing.
Yangtze Memory Technologies Company, Ltd. et al.vsMicron Technology, Inc. et al.
Yangtze Memory Technologies petitions the PTAB to invalidate 18 claims of Micron's 3D NAND patent, arguing anticipation and obviousness over four prior‑art references. The petition seeks institution and cancellation of the claims.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al.vsNetlist, Inc.
The PTAB held that Samsung and its co‑petitioners proved all 34 claims of Netlist’s ’060 memory‑package patent were obvious over a combination of prior‑art references, rendering the claims unpatentable.
Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. et al.vsConcurrent Ventures, LLC et al.
Patent owners seek rehearing to overturn the PTAB's denial of discretionary denial, arguing that a June 2026 trial in the parallel district court precedes the PTAB's final decision deadline, invoking Fintiv factors. They reference a prior Director decision in a related IPR that denied institution under similar circumstances.
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.