Short Summary
Tableau Software filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate iCharts’ ’595 patent covering interactive chart creation. The petition alleges all 18 claims are obvious over prior‑art tools such as Rostoker and QlikView manuals, invoking 35 U.S.C. §103.
Detailed Summary
In a petition for inter partes review of U.S. Patent No. 9,712,595, Tableau Software challenges the validity of all 18 claims covering systems and methods for creating interactive charts. The petitioner argues that each claim is obvious in view of a combination of prior‑art references—including the Rostoker publication, QlikView Reference and Server manuals, and secondary references Clark, Jou, and Couckuyt—under 35 U.S.C. §103. The petition also asserts there is no objective indicia of patentability and that discretionary denial under §325(d) is inappropriate, requesting that the PTAB institute the IPR and cancel 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 Tableau Software, LLC et al. vs iCharts LLC is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
Apple, Inc.vsTHL Holding Company, LLC
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding claims 11-19 unpatentable over combinations of prior art references. The Petitioner successfully demonstrated that the combination of Kalliola and other references taught or suggested multiple limitations, particularly regarding UWB DoA and location tracking. This decision significantly weakens the patent's validity in the device location/ranging space.
DataDome S.A. et al.vsArkose Labs Holdings, Inc.
DataDome has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate all 20 claims of Arkose Labs' CAPTCHA‑related patent, arguing they are obvious over prior art such as the Lim patent and its combinations with Lillibridge and Guthrie.
Google LLCvsSecure Communication Technologies, LLC
Google has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate Secure Communication Technologies' U.S. Patent 11,334,918 covering proximity‑beacon communications. The petition relies on five prior‑art references to argue anticipation and obviousness of claims 1‑8.
Google LLCvsSecure Communication Technologies, LLC
Google’s IPR against a proximity‑based commerce patent resulted in 20 of 22 challenged claims being found unpatentable, with two claims surviving.
Apple Inc.vsApex Beam Technologies LLC
The PTAB granted institution of an IPR against Apex Beam’s 10,568,113 patent, finding Samsung has shown a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on at least one claim based on obviousness over Xia and Xia + Jover.
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.