Short Summary
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.
Detailed Summary
In a petition for inter partes review (IPR2025‑01587), Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. request the PTAB to cancel all 31 claims of U.S. Patent No. 8,593,358, which claims a wireless device with a multiband antenna array, MIMO and beam‑switchable configurations, and isolation means. The petitioner contends that each claim is obvious in view of a combination of prior‑art references—including Wen, Poilasne, Govind, Vlahos, and Rubinshteyn—providing motivation to combine antenna arrays, tuners, and RF isolation. The petition also identifies a means‑plus‑function limitation in claim 22 that is not supported by the specification. The filing includes expert testimony, related district‑court litigation, and references to several additional IPRs in the same patent family.
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 Massively Broadband LLC is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
REC Solar Holdings AS et al.vsMaxeon Solar PTE. Ltd.
REC Solar seeks cancellation of claims 9‑12 of Maxeon’s 8,222,516 solar‑cell patent, asserting obviousness over several prior‑art references and invoking collateral estoppel from earlier PTAB rulings.
Monahan Products, LLC (dba UPPAbaby) et al.vsBaby Jogger, LLC et al.
UPPAbaby has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate all 30 claims of Baby Jogger’s stroller‑seat attachment patent (U.S. 8,955,869) on the basis of obviousness over multiple prior‑art references.
ToughBuilt Industries, Inc.vsMeridian International Co. Ltd.
The PTAB granted institution for IPR2025-01461 after determining the petitioner showed a reasonable likelihood of prevailing or that at least one challenged claim was unpatentable.
Digital Global Systems, Inc.vsDeepSig Inc.
The PTAB denied institution of an IPR challenge against DeepSig Inc.'s radio communication patent (11,777,540) filed by Digital Global Systems, citing insufficient evidence that the claims were obvious over prior art.
Amazon.com, Inc. et al.vsSoundClear Technologies LLC et al.
Amazon has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of seven claims of SoundClear’s ’819 patent covering volume‑lock functionality in audio devices. The petition relies on prior‑art references Kajiyama, Shure, and Nelson to argue obviousness under §103.
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.