Short Summary
Samsung Austin Semiconductor challenges the '802 Patent covering Chemical Mechanical Planarization (CMP) pad dressing technology. The Petitioner argues that prior art references, including Tsai et al., anticipate or render obvious all 21 claimed claims. This is a foundational challenge to the patent's validity in semiconductor manufacturing.
Detailed Summary
Samsung Austin Semiconductor, LLC and its affiliates have filed an IPR challenging the validity of U.S. Patent No. 9724802, which relates to Chemical Mechanical Planarization (CMP) pad dressing technology. The Petitioner asserts that the claims are invalid under both anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102) and obviousness (35 U.S.C. § 103). The core of the challenge rests on prior art references, specifically Tsai et al., Sung’026, and Sung’146. Petitioner contends that these references disclose or render obvious key features of the claimed CMP pad dressers, such as specific tip variations and structural configurations, thereby establishing a prima facie case for invalidity across claims 1-21.
Practitioner Note
This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in Samsung Austin Semiconductor, LLC et al. vs Sung, Chien-Min is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
NJOY, Inc.vsJUUL Labs, Inc.
The PTAB denied NJOY's request to challenge JUUL's electronic cigarette patent (RE49114), finding that the Petitioner failed to meet the burden of showing a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on any claim.
Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., et al.vsMobile Data Technologies LLC
Samsung has filed a petition for Director Review after the PTAB denied institution of an IPR against Mobile Data Technologies' patent 9,619,578. The petition alleges abuse of discretion, examiner error, and violations of due process. It seeks reversal and institution of the review.
HS Hyosung Advanced Materials Corp. et al.vsKolon Industries, Inc.
Hyosung has filed an IPR petition challenging Kolon's 10,196,765 patent covering hybrid nylon‑aramid tire cords, asserting that all six claims are obvious over prior art such as Nakayasu and Fritsch.
DELL INC. et al.vsAX Wireless, LLC et al.
Dell and AX Wireless jointly moved to terminate IPR 2024-00682 after reaching a settlement and filing a joint stipulation for dismissal in the Eastern District of Texas.
BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd.vsPaneltouch Technologies LLC
BOE Technology and Paneltouch Technologies settled their inter partes review of U.S. Patent 11,126,025, leading the PTAB to terminate the proceeding and keep the settlement confidential.
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.