Apple Inc. v. Telcom Ventures LLC

Foleon Inc. et al.vsTURTL SURF & IMMERSE LIMITED

The USPTO Director denied Foleon Inc.’s request for review of the decision to deny institution of an IPR against Turtl Surf & Immerse Limited’s patent 12,118,290. The denial leaves the institution decision unchanged.

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al.vsNetlist, Inc.

Samsung and its Micron affiliates successfully challenged Netlist's 8,787,060 B2 memory‑package patent. The PTAB found all 34 claims obvious over a combination of prior‑art references, rendering the patent unpatentable.

Eoptolink Technology USA Inc. et al.vsApplied Optoelectronics, Inc.

Eoptolink has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of claims 1‑9 and 15‑19 of Applied Optoelectronics’ ’890 patent, asserting anticipation and obviousness based on Takashi, Sato, and Ho references. The petition emphasizes that the claimed TOSA features were known in the industry prior to filing.

Merck Sharp & Dohme LLCvsHalozyme, Inc. et al.

Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC successfully challenged Halozyme, Inc.'s '590 patent on grounds of enablement and obviousness. The PTAB found the claims were overly broad regarding polypeptide scope, requiring undue experimentation for a skilled artisan.

Eunsung Global Corp.vsHydraFacial LLC et al.

Eunsung Global Corp. petitions the PTAB to cancel HydraFacial's 11,446,477 skin‑treatment patent, alleging obviousness over several prior‑art references.