Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v. Netlist, Inc.

Teladoc Health, Inc.vsData Health Partners, Inc.

Teladoc Health, Inc. challenges the validity of Data Health Partners' patent (11144554) in an IPR proceeding, asserting that the goal-tracking system is obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The petitioner relies on multiple combinations of prior art references, including Douglas, Wager, Chitiveli, Klotsche, and Koh, to invalidate numerous claims related to client/patient progress tracking in healthcare.

WIZ, Inc.vsOrca Security Ltd.

Certificate of Service for the Final Written Decision in IPR2024-00863 concerning patent 11,663,031.

Shenzhen Root Technology Co., Ltd. et al.vsWillow Innovations, Inc. et al.

Shenzhen Root Technology Co., Ltd. successfully petitioned the PTAB to institute an IPR against Willow Blossom Holdco Limited's breast pump patent (11813381). The Board found a reasonable likelihood of unpatentability based on multiple grounds of obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103, citing combinations of prior art references like Chang and Fang.

Apple Inc.vsProxense, LLC

Apple has filed an IPR petition challenging all 20 claims of Proxense’s ’188 patent, asserting obviousness over multiple prior‑art references and arguing that discretionary denial is unwarranted.

DELL INC. et al.vsAX Wireless, LLC et al.

Dell and AX Wireless settled eight inter partes review proceedings covering wireless patents. The Board granted joint motions to terminate the IPRs and treated the settlement agreements as confidential.