Executive Summary
Kia and Toyota have filed a PTAB post‑grant review petition challenging Emerging Automotive’s vehicle‑key sharing patent (US 12,337,715). Petitioners allege obviousness over four prior‑art references and assert lack of written description for key claim limitations. They seek institution and cancellation of claims 1‑24.
Related Cases
Western Digital Technologies, Inc. et al.vsGodo Kaisha IP Bridge 1
Western Digital Technologies' IPR challenge against Godo Kaisha IP Bridge 1 regarding Magnetic Tunnel Junctions (MTJ) was denied by the PTAB. The Board found that the Petitioner failed to demonstrate a sufficient motivation to combine prior art references, specifically rejecting arguments based on barrier height optimization.
Amphenol CorporationvsCredo Technology Group Ltd.
Amphenol and Credo have settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 10,877,233 and jointly request that the settlement agreement be kept confidential as the proceeding is terminated.
Dr. Squatch, LLCvsThe Procter & Gamble Company
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding all 15 challenged claims unpatentable. The Board found that the claimed deodorant stick compositions were anticipated or obvious over various combinations of prior art references. This decision heavily favors the Petitioner, Dr. Squatch, LLC, by invalidating the patent's scope.
Tessell, Inc.vsNutanix, Inc.
The PTAB denied Tessell's petitions for Director Review of the institution decisions in two IPRs involving Nutanix patents, leaving the institution denials intact.
Google LLCvsSecure Communication Technologies, LLC
Google’s IPR against a proximity‑based advertising patent resulted in five of the nine challenged claims being found unpatentable, while the remaining four claims were upheld.
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.