Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v. GenghisComm Holdings LLC

IPR2025-00899

Samsung has filed an IPR petition challenging 21 claims of GenghisComm’s ’386 OFDM patent, asserting anticipation and obviousness over Shattil‑537, Galda, Brüninghaus and Dowling.

Jurisdiction
US PTAB
Case Number
IPR2025-00899
Decision Date
28 April 2025
Filing Date
28 April 2025

Detailed Summary

In Petition IPR2025‑00899, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and its affiliate Samsung Electronics America, Inc. seek inter partes review of 21 claims of U.S. Patent No. 11,431,386 owned by GenghisComm Holdings LLC. The challenger contends that the claims are either anticipated by the Shattil‑537 international publication or rendered obvious by combinations of prior art references, including Shattil‑537, Galda, Brüninghaus, and Dowling. Detailed analyses map each claim limitation to specific teachings, arguing that a person of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine these teachings to achieve the claimed subject matter. The petition includes expert declarations and a comprehensive exhibit list, and it reserves the right to address discretionary denial arguments later.

Practitioner Note

This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. vs GenghisComm Holdings LLC is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.

Related Cases

patentIPR2024-00847

AMAZON.COM, INC. et al.vsNokia Technologies Oy

Amazon challenged Nokia's video coding patent (7532808) at the PTAB, arguing that the claims are obvious over prior art references like Karczewicz and Frojdh. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of unpatentability for several claims, supporting Amazon’s position on key skip coding mode limitations.

patentIPR2025-01108

Element TV Company, LP et al.vsNokia Technologies Oy

Element TV has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate Nokia’s ’808 video‑coding patent. The challenge relies on obviousness over the Karczewicz publication and the MPEG‑1/H.263 standards. The petition adopts prior Board constructions from an earlier Amazon IPR.

patentIPR2025-01435

Tempus AI, Inc.vsGuardant Health Inc.

Tempus AI has filed an IPR petition challenging Guardant Health’s ’916 patent covering cfDNA‑based microsatellite instability detection. The petition asserts obviousness over a combination of Schmitt, Forshew, Porreca, and Sacko references.

patentIPR2025-01316

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al.vsMaxell, LTD.

The PTAB denied institution for Samsung against Maxell's patent 10812646 after a merits review, finding the petitioner failed to meet the likelihood of prevailing standard.

patentIPR2025-01397

CrowdStrike, Inc.vsSkysong Innovations, LLC

CrowdStrike has filed an IPR petition challenging all 17 claims of Skysong Innovations’ U.S. Patent 10,313,385. The challenger asserts that the claims are obvious over six prior‑art references, invoking 35 U.S.C. § 103. The petition is pending before the PTAB.

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