Executive Summary
Entropic Communications requests Director review of a PTAB decision that found its television channel‑selection patent unpatentable. The owner argues the Board ignored prior examiner and reexamination findings, violating a recent Director memorandum.
Related Cases
Red Hat, Inc.vsCompetitive Access Systems, Inc.
Red Hat has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of all five claims of Competitive Access Systems’ residential gateway patent, arguing they are obvious over multiple prior‑art references. The petition relies on Challener, Kotzin, Ades, and Xin to demonstrate lack of novelty.
Microsoft CorporationvsSandpiper CDN, LLC
The USPTO Director denied Google’s request for review of institution decisions in four IPRs against Sandpiper CDN’s CDN patents. The denial leaves the original institution rulings intact.
2985 LLC d/b/a Mountain Voyage Company, LLCvsThe Ridge Wallet LLC
Mountain Voyage's IPR petition against The Ridge Wallet was denied by the PTAB because it was filed more than one year after receiving a district court infringement complaint, rendering the attempt to join related proceedings moot.
Cisco Systems, Inc.vsLionra Technologies Limited
Cisco Systems successfully petitioned to institute IPR against Lionra Technologies regarding patent 7,738,471, challenging claims related to high-speed packet header processing.
Inari Agriculture, Inc.vsPioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc.
The PTAB denied institution of a PGR petition challenging the patentability of an inbred maize variety, finding that the petitioner failed to meet the burden of showing unpatentability on merits. The Board specifically noted the lack of evidence regarding the claimed genotype and found no unsettled legal questions warranting institutional review.
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.