Short Summary
Zhuhai CosMX Battery has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of all 22 claims of Ningde Amperex’s U.S. Patent 11,923,498, alleging obviousness over six prior‑art references. The petition argues no discretionary factors oppose institution.
Detailed Summary
In Petition IPR2025‑00389, Zhuhai CosMX Battery Co., Ltd. challenges U.S. Patent 11,923,498 owned by Ningde Amperex Technology Ltd. (CATL). The petitioner contends that claims 1‑22 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) because each claim would have been obvious in view of combinations of prior‑art references—Sato, Takemura, Nakamura, Kobayashi, Oh‑539, and Oh‑144—covering lithium‑ion battery structures, insulating layers, and recess dimensions. The petition further asserts that no secondary considerations or discretionary factors under §§ 325(d) or 314(a) weigh against institution, and therefore requests the Board to institute the IPR and find all claims unpatentable.
Practitioner Note
This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in Zhuhai CosMX Battery Co., Ltd. vs Ningde Amperex Technology Ltd. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
Rode Microphones, LLC et al.vsZaxcom, Inc.
The PTAB denied Rode Microphones' request for Director Review of the institution decisions in three IPRs, including the 7,711,443 patent owned by Zaxcom. The institution rulings therefore remain in effect.
Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. et al.vsOS - NEW HORIZON PERSONAL COMPUTING SOLUTIONS LTD.
Samsung has petitioned the PTAB to review OS‑New Horizon’s U.S. Pat. 8,401,875 covering multi‑biometric authentication in handheld devices, asserting that a combination of prior‑art references renders the asserted claims obvious under 35 U.S.C. §103.
BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd.vsSamsung Display Co., Ltd.
BOE Technology and Samsung Display settled their IPR dispute before trial. The Board granted a joint motion to terminate and ordered the settlement agreement to remain confidential.
Straumann USA, LLC et al.vsSmart Denture Conversions, LLC.
Straumann USA petitions the PTAB to invalidate 12 claims of Smart Denture Conversions' dental implant patent, alleging anticipation and obviousness over multiple prior‑art references.
Imperative Care, Inc.vsInari Medical, Inc. et al.
The PTAB instituted an inter partes review of Inari Medical’s 11,554,005 B2 catheter aspiration patent after Imperative Care showed a reasonable likelihood of success on at least one claim. The review covers all 15 claims and four obviousness grounds involving Garrison, Schaffer, Hartley, and Eller references.
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.