Comcast Corporation et al. v. Entropic Communications LLC

IPR2024-00438

The Board denied Comcast’s request for Director Review of the Final Written Decision in the IPR concerning Entropic Communications’ patent 11,399,206. The denial applies to three related IPRs filed by the same parties.

Jurisdiction
US PTAB
Case Number
IPR2024-00438
Decision Date
16 February 2024
Filing Date
16 February 2024

Detailed Summary

In an order dated January 26, 2026, the USPTO Director denied the petitioners’ requests for Director Review of the Final Written Decisions in three inter partes review proceedings, including IPR2024-00438 that challenges Entropic Communications’ U.S. Patent No. 11,399,206. The petitioners, represented by Banner & Witcoff, sought to overturn the Board’s findings, but after considering the submissions from both sides, the Director concluded that the requests did not merit review and issued a blanket denial for all three cases.

Practitioner Note

This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in Comcast Corporation et al. vs Entropic Communications LLC is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.

Related Cases

patentIPR2024-00521

Dexcom, Inc.vsAbbott Diabetes Care Inc.

Dexcom and Abbott Diabetes Care settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 11,298,056 covering continuous glucose monitoring technology. The parties filed a joint motion to terminate, and the Board granted termination without a final written decision.

patentIPR2024-01419

Illumina, Inc.vsMolecular Loop Biosciences, Inc.

The PTAB upheld the patentability of claims 1-9 for Molecular Loop Biosciences against Illumina. The Board rejected all grounds of anticipation and obviousness over prior art like Chee, finding that the required 'collapsing step' necessitates combining both target sequence and differentiator tag information.

patentIPR2024-01458

R.J. Reynolds Vapor Company et al.vsHealthier Choices Management Corp.

R.J. Reynolds Vapor Company successfully petitioned to institute IPR against Healthier Choices Management Corp.'s electronic cigarette patent (9538788), arguing the claims are obvious in light of prior art.

patentIPR2025-00062

Zepp Health CorporationvsSlyde Analytics, LLC

Zepp Health and Slyde Analytics have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 9,804,678 and jointly moved to terminate the pending inter partes review. The Board has not yet instituted the proceeding, and the parties cite public‑policy reasons for termination.

patentIPR2024-01504

Integrated DNA Technologies, Inc. et al.vsTecan Group AG

Tecan Genomics filed a comprehensive set of objections to Integrated DNA Technologies’ evidentiary exhibits in IPR2024‑01504, citing multiple FRE rules to block hearsay, irrelevant, and unauthenticated material. The objections were timely filed after the institution 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