Zepp Health Corporation v. University of Connecticut

TESLA, INC.vsiQar Inc.

Tesla challenges iQar Inc.'s patent (10850616) in a PTAB petition, asserting that the claims are anticipated or obvious over prior art references like Koebler650. The petitioner argues that combining existing technologies to improve vehicle power management was predictable for a POSITA.

Nokia of America Corporation et al.vsIarnach Technologies Limited

Nokia of America Corporation et al.'s IPR petition against Iarnach Technologies Limited was denied by the PTAB, preventing trial on claims 1-11. The Board found that the combination of prior art references (G.984.3 and Khermosh) did not sufficiently teach or suggest the claimed method for managing upstream burst overhead parameters in PON systems.

Neurocrine Biosciences, Inc.vsSpruce Biosciences, Inc.

The PTAB held that Neurocrine Biosciences' challenge succeeded; claims 1‑25 of Spruce Biosciences' ’908 patent were found unpatentable for lack of written description under 35 U.S.C. §112(a). The Board applied Ariad standards and rejected the genus claim.

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al.vsASUS Technology Licensing Inc.

Samsung and ASUS settled four inter partes review proceedings before any trial began. The Board granted the joint motion to terminate and ordered the settlement agreements to be kept confidential.

Samsung Austin Semiconductor, LLC et al.vsSung, Chien-Min

The PTAB found all 20 claims of U.S. Patent No. 9138862 unpatentable by anticipation or obviousness over Sung ’026. The technology relates to Chemical Mechanical Polishing (CMP) pad conditioning methods, and the Board concluded that Petitioner successfully established invalidity across all grounds presented.