Executive Summary
NormShield has filed an IPR petition challenging BitSight's network‑security rating patent (U.S. 9,973,524). The petition relies on §103 obviousness over McNab, McGovern, and Cole references and argues that FINTIV and §325(d) factors oppose denial.
Related Cases
Apple Inc.vsMyPort Technologies, Inc.
Apple has filed an IPR petition challenging MyPort’s ’066 patent, asserting that claims 6‑17 are obvious over prior art references Spatharis, Manjunath, Fuller, and Jain. The petition seeks institution of the review to cancel the challenged claims.
Comcast Corporation et al.vsEntropic Communications LLC
Comcast challenges the PTAB’s finding that its TV channel‑selection patent is unpatentable, filing a Director Review Request alleging the Board ignored prior Office findings on the same technology. The Patent Owner seeks reversal of the decision under the Director’s 2025 memorandum.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al.vsNetlist, Inc.
Samsung Electronics successfully secured institution in this IPR, challenging all 20 claims of Netlist's patent (11880319) based on obviousness and anticipation. The Board found that the Petitioner demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of unpatentability over various combinations of prior art, including Hazelzet, JEDEC, Buchmann, Wang, and Kim. This decision sets a strong precedent for challenging memory module initialization claims using industry standards and technical literature.
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. et al.vsOMNI MEDSCI, INC.
Apple successfully invalidated Omni MedSci’s wearable pulse‑oximeter patent in a final PTAB decision, finding all 23 claims unpatentable for obviousness. The Board affirmed claim constructions and applied the petitioner’s alternative argument on the combination of prior‑art references.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al.vsHeadwater Research LLC
Samsung and Headwater Research entered a settlement that led to a joint motion to terminate the IPR over patent 8,588,110. The Board granted the motion, dismissing the proceeding and treating the settlement documents as confidential.
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.