Short Summary
LithiumHub Technologies and Shenzhen FBTech settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 9,412,994, seeking Board approval to dismiss the proceeding.
Detailed Summary
In IPR2025-00825 concerning U.S. Patent 9,412,994 titled “Lithium starter battery and solid state switch therefor,” the Board issued a notice granting the petitioners three months to file a preliminary response. Before the deadline, the petitioners and Patent Owner reached a settlement and agreed to dismiss the IPR. The Patent Owner filed a Notice of Settlement, joining the petitioners’ request for an unopposed motion to dismiss the IPR and to keep the settlement agreement confidential. The Board has yet to grant the dismissal authorization.
Practitioner Note
This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in Shenzhen Fbtech Electronics Ltd. et al. vs LithiumHub Technologies, LLC et al. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC et al.vsThe Johns Hopkins University
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding multiple claims of the '975 patent unpatentable. The petitioner successfully demonstrated that the claimed methods and drug characteristics were anticipated (102) or rendered obvious (103) by prior art, primarily the MSI-H Study Record (MSR).
HS Hyosung Advanced Materials Corp. et al.vsKolon Industries, Inc.
Hyosung has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate Kolon’s 9,789,731 patent covering hybrid nylon‑aramid tire cords, arguing that all seven claims are obvious over multiple prior‑art references.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al.vsNetlist, Inc.
The USPTO denied Samsung and Micron’s request for Director Review of two IPR decisions, leaving the Board’s final written decisions in place.
Dolby Laboratories, Inc. et al.vsInterDigital Madison Patent Holdings, SAS et al.
Dolby Laboratories has filed an IPR petition challenging U.S. Patent 9,185,268, which covers methods for color correcting display content. The petition asserts that the claims are obvious over a combination of prior‑art references and requests the Board to institute the review.
IPG Photonics CorporationvsTrumpf Laser- Und Systemtechnik GMBH
IPG Photonics has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of all 20 claims of TRUMPF’s ’054 laser‑fiber patent, alleging obviousness over a suite of prior‑art fiber‑laser references. The petition outlines four grounds covering the full claim set.
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.