Executive Summary
The USPTO denied XiFi Networks’ request for Director Review, leaving Samsung’s institution of multiple Wi‑Fi patents intact.
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 XiFi Networks R&D, Inc. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
ClearCorrect Operating, LLC et al.vsAlign Technology, Inc.
ClearCorrect challenges Align Technology’s dental aligner patent in a Director Review proceeding, arguing the patent owner’s request raises new RPI arguments and evidence that are barred. The petitioner seeks denial of the review.
CISCO SYSTEMS, INC.vsUMBRA TECHNOLOGIES LTD.
Umbra has filed a Director Review request challenging the PTAB’s claim construction for an “end-to-end tunnel” and seeking to vacate the institution of review for Cisco’s IPR. The Board had instituted the IPR based on an obviousness finding over Hankins and Munger references.
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., et al.vsSinotechnix LLC
Samsung and Sinotechnix have settled their OLED display patent dispute and jointly moved to terminate the IPR, requesting the settlement be kept confidential.
Rode Microphones, LLC et al.vsZaxcom, Inc.
Zaxcom seeks Director Review of the PTAB’s institution decision for its 2019 microphone patent, arguing the Board misapplied discretionary considerations and ignored Guidance. The request targets claims 17‑19, 21‑23, 33‑34, 59‑60, and 66.
Koki Holdings America Ltd. et al.vsKyocera Senco Industrial Tools, Inc.
Koki Holdings and Kyocera Senco reached a settlement over U.S. Patent 11,034,007 and jointly moved to terminate IPR2025-00261, requesting the settlement be kept confidential under 35 U.S.C. §317(b) and 37 C.F.R. §42.74(c).
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.