Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v. Massively Broadband LLC

IPR2025-01587

Samsung has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of all 31 claims of Massively Broadband’s ’358 patent covering multiband antenna arrays. The petition relies on multiple prior‑art references to argue obviousness under 35 U.S.C. §103.

Jurisdiction
US PTAB
Case Number
IPR2025-01587
Filing Date
21 October 2025
Status
ok

Related Cases

patentIPR2025-00165

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al.vsSiOnyx, LLC

Samsung and patent‑owner SiOnyx settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 9,905,599 before a trial began. The Board granted a joint motion to terminate and ordered the settlement documents to be kept confidential.

patentIPR2024-00905

fuboTV Media Inc.vsDISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.

The USPTO denied fuboTV Media Inc.'s request for Director Review of the Final Written Decision in several IPRs against DISH Technologies patents.

patentIPR2025-00916

Intel Corporation et al.vsAdvanced Cluster Systems, Inc.

Intel and AMD have filed a joint motion to terminate IPR2025-00916 after reaching a settlement with patent owner Advanced Cluster Systems. The motion cites statutory authority and argues that termination conserves resources and supports settlement policy.

patentIPR2024-01230

Thermaltake Technology Co., Ltd. et al.vsChen, Chien-Hao et al.

Thermaltake has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of all five claims of Lian Li’s illumination‑fan patent, arguing they are obvious over multiple prior‑art references. The petition also argues that the Board should not deny institution under discretionary statutes.

patentIPR2024-01093

Samsung Display Co., Ltd. et al.vsPictiva Displays International Ltd. et al.

Pictiva Displays has filed a Director Review request to overturn the PTAB’s institution of an IPR against Samsung Display’s ‘164 patent, arguing the Board ignored a full Fintiv analysis after a guidance memo was rescinded.

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