Eunsung Global Corp. v. HydraFacial LLC et al.

Catalyst OrthoScience Inc.vsShoulder Innovations, Inc.

Catalyst OrthoScience has petitioned the PTAB to institute a post‑grant review of Shoulder Innovations' reverse shoulder implant patent, asserting obviousness over six prior‑art references and indefiniteness of key claim terms.

Samsung Electronics America, Inc. et al.vsTelcom Ventures LLC

The USPTO denied Samsung's request for rehearing of a discretionary denial and institution denial across several IPRs, including IPR2025-00978 covering patent 12,028,793. The Board affirmed the original decision, leaving the patent dispute unresolved at this stage.

Apple Inc.vsS.M.R Innovations LTD et al.

The PTAB found the Petitioner (Apple Inc.) successfully demonstrated unpatentability of 12 claims against S.M.R Innovations LTD et al. The Board determined that the combination of prior art references taught or suggested all limitations for multiple challenged claims, particularly under § 103.

Amazon.com, Inc. et al.vsNokia Technologies Oy

Amazon and Nokia settled their IPR dispute over patent 8,175,148. The Board granted a joint motion to terminate the proceeding and treated the settlement documents as confidential, without deciding the merits.

Entegris, Inc.vsInpria Corporation

Entegris has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of claims 1‑4 and 6‑10 of Inpria’s ’903 patent, asserting that the claimed high‑purity organotin compositions are fully disclosed in earlier literature. The petition challenges the patent on anticipation and obviousness grounds and argues that Inpria’s examiner‑era declarations were misleading.