Short Summary
Abbott Laboratories filed a Petition challenging Newtonoid Technologies' patent claims based on obviousness. The petitioner argues that combining known technologies, such as dynamic barcodes and environmental monitoring, renders the claims unpatentable over multiple prior art references. This challenge targets 18 specific claims related to stimuli-responsive labels.
Detailed Summary
Abbott Laboratories has initiated a PTAB petition against Newtonoid Technologies regarding Patent No. 11392818 (Sensing and Tracking). The core argument is that the claimed combination of static (e.g., barcode) and dynamic (stimuli-responsive material) information is obvious. This obviousness is supported by three distinct sets of prior art combinations: Prusik/Vaillant (cold chain management), Burg (diagnostic instruments), and Dimov (image-based diagnostics). The petition challenges 18 claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103, detailing how each combination discloses every limitation of the challenged claims.
Practitioner Note
This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in Abbott Laboratories vs Newtonoid Technologies, LLC is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
Askeladden L.L.C.vsIntercurrency Software LLC
Askeladden L.L.C. successfully petitioned to institute an IPR against Intercurrency Software LLC's patent 10062107, challenging claims 19-36 based on obviousness (103). The Board found a reasonable likelihood of success for the petitioner regarding at least one challenged claim, advancing the dispute into the trial phase.
Sinclair Pharma Limited et al.vsHydraFacial LLC
The PTAB denied Sinclair Pharma’s request for a rehearing of the order that vacated the institution of IPR2025‑00145 concerning HydraFacial’s skin‑care device patent. The Board found no basis to grant rehearing after reviewing the parties’ submissions.
Apple Inc.vsSmith Interface Technologies, LLC
Apple Inc. filed an Inter Partes Review challenging Smith Interface Technologies' patent on gesture recognition and scaling (U.S. Patent No. 10,936,114). Petitioner asserts the claims are obvious over various prior art references, including Kim, Lang, Burrough, and Bowens. The dispute involves fundamental technology used in modern touch screen interfaces.
Nokia of America Corporation et al.vsWoodbury Wireless, LLC
Nokia, AT&T and T‑Mobile have entered settlement agreements with Woodbury Wireless and jointly moved to terminate the inter partes review of U.S. Patent No. 10,211,895. The motion relies on statutory authority allowing termination when parties agree to settle.
Bowmar Archery LLCvsFuttere, Matthew
Bowmar Archery LLC successfully challenged Matthew Futtere's patent (8043177) in the PTAB, leading to institution on grounds of anticipation and obviousness. The Board adopted key claim constructions while finding a reasonable likelihood of unpatentability for at least claim 11.
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.