SIG Sauer, Inc. v. Lone Star Future Weapons, Inc. et al.

PacifiCorp et al.vsMES, Inc.

PacifiCorp and affiliated utilities have filed a petition to invalidate MES’s ’225 mercury‑removal patent. The petition alleges lack of written‑description support, obviousness over prior art, and anticipation, and urges the PTAB not to deny institution.

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al.vsHEADWATER RESEARCH LLC

Samsung has filed an IPR petition challenging all 18 claims of Headwater Research’s U.S. Patent 10,28144, asserting obviousness over Wright and, in combination, Tzannes and Smith. The petition seeks institution of the review and argues that discretionary denial is unwarranted.

Abbott Diabetes Care Inc. et al.vsDexCom, Inc.

Abbott Diabetes Care and DexCom settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 10,709,364 B2, leading the PTAB to terminate the IPR before any merits were decided. The settlement agreement was also designated as confidential business information.

Innolux CorporationvsPhenix Longhorn LLC

The PTAB denied Innolux Corporation's IPR petition against Phenix Longhorn LLC, citing the proximity of a parallel district court trial date to the statutory deadline.

Aylo Freesites Ltd et al.vsDISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.

The PTAB denied the IPR petition filed by Aylo Freesites Ltd against DISH Technologies L.L.C., citing a failure to demonstrate reasonable diligence in its prior art search and unfavorable General Plastic factors. The Board found that the Petitioner could not have reasonably avoided finding highly relevant references, leading to the denial of institution for all 16 claims at issue.