Short Summary
TikTok has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate NTECH's U.S. Patent 9,923,947 covering custom media programming. The petition relies on three § 103 obviousness grounds using Whitehead, Marcus ’904, and Cristofalo references. The Board is asked to institute the review.
Detailed Summary
TikTok Inc., together with its affiliates, has submitted a petition for inter partes review of U.S. Patent No. 9,923,947, owned by NTECH Properties, Inc. The patent claims a method for generating and updating customized media programming using an aggregator and a publisher. TikTok contends that claims 1 and 2 are obvious in view of three prior‑art references: Whitehead (U.S. Pat. 8,555,318), Marcus ’904 (U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2006/0015904), and Cristofalo (U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2002/0152117). Each ground is framed under 35 U.S.C. § 103, asserting that the prior art either alone or in combination renders the claimed steps obvious. The petition also argues that there is no basis for discretionary denial under § 325(d) or the Fintiv factors and requests that the PTAB institute the IPR and find the claims unpatentable. A related district‑court case (NTECH Properties, Inc. v. ByteDance Ltd., No. 2:24‑cv‑00130) is pending, and TikTok is filing parallel IPRs against related family patents.
Practitioner Note
This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in TikTok Inc. et al. vs NTECH Properties, Inc. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
Wealth, Inc.vs--
Wealth, Inc. has filed a Post‑Grant Review petition seeking cancellation of all 20 claims of Vanilla Technologies’ U.S. Patent 12,353,917, alleging ineligibility, obviousness, indefiniteness, and an improper dependent claim. The petition relies on prior‑art references Racanelli, Bateman, Dintenfass, McMillen and Kwak.
Microsoft CorporationvsQomplx LLC
Microsoft has filed an IPR petition challenging 16 claims of Qomplx’s U.S. Patent 12,301,627 covering graph‑based network anomaly detection. The challenger asserts obviousness over prior‑art references Stokes, Crabtree, and Sekar under 35 U.S.C. §103.
Microsoft CorporationvsToutVirtual, Inc.
Microsoft has filed an IPR petition challenging all 20 claims of ToutVirtual’s ‘667 patent covering virtual system management, asserting obviousness over multiple prior‑art references.
Cisco Systems, Inc.vsGOLDEN EYE TECHNOLOGIES LLC
Cisco has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate claims 1‑3 and 13‑15 of Golden Eye Technologies' 9,717,037 patent. The challenger argues the claims are obvious over earlier Wi‑Fi standards and patents (Choudhary, Hasty, Chen). The petition requests the Board to institute the review and cancel the challenged claims.
Cisco Systems, Inc.vsGolden Eye Technologies LLC
Cisco has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate claims 1‑4 and 9‑11 of Golden Eye’s ’556 Wi‑Fi scanning patent, arguing that the claims are obvious over three earlier patents. The petition emphasizes that the patent was allowed despite acknowledging the same prior‑art concepts.
Pinterest, Inc.vs--
Pinterest has filed an IPR petition challenging all 20 claims of OpenTV’s ’703 patent, asserting that the claims are obvious over prior art such as Orr, Hsu, Lim, and Hervey.
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.