Google LLC v. Sandpiper CDN, LLC

Juniper Networks, IncvsMonarch Networking Solutions LLC

Juniper Networks challenges the validity of Monarch Networking Solutions' '845 patent, asserting that claims related to IPv6/IPv4 transition and NAT are obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The petitioner relies on combinations of prior art references (Li, Li-2, Paunikar, Wu) to demonstrate the lack of nonobviousness in networking technology.

Skechers U.S.A., Inc.vsNike, Inc.

The PTAB institution of IPR2025-00141, filed by Skechers against Nike, moves forward to challenge the patent's validity on grounds of anticipation (102) and obviousness (103). The Board found that Petitioner demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of prevailing after vacating an initial discretionary denial.

Innoscience America, Inc. et al.vsInfineon Technologies Austria AG

Innoscience America challenges Infineon's patent on power semiconductor packaging, asserting obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The petitioner argues that combining known device structures with established packaging techniques renders the claimed features predictable to a Person Having Ordinary Skill in the Art.

Ford Motor CompanyvsAutoConnect Holdings LLC

Ford Motor Company has filed an IPR petition challenging AutoConnect’s U.S. Patent 9,173,100 covering vehicle network security. The petition argues lack of priority support and obviousness over four prior‑art references. Ford seeks institution and a finding that the claims are unpatentable.

Merck Sharp & Dohme LLCvsHalozyme, Inc. et al.

Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC successfully challenged Halozyme, Inc.'s '590 patent on grounds of enablement and obviousness. The PTAB found the claims were overly broad regarding polypeptide scope, requiring undue experimentation for a skilled artisan.