Tableau Software, LLC et al. v. iCharts LLC

IPR2024-01388

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.

Jurisdiction
US PTAB
Case Number
IPR2024-01388
Decision Date
26 September 2024
Filing Date
26 September 2024

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

patentIPR2024-00399

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.

patentIPR2025-00694

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.

patentIPR2025-01181

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.

patentIPR2025-01181

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.

patentIPR2025-00895

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.

Arctic Invent — IP Strategy

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.

Talk to our patent team →

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.

Strategy Consult

Facing a similar patent matter?

Arctic's litigation team uses precedent data like this to build winning arguments.

Get a Strategy Call