Short Summary
Google has petitioned the PTAB to invalidate all 20 claims of Sandpiper CDN’s CDN patent, arguing anticipation by Newton-471 and obviousness over Dilley, Pai, and Wang. The petition stresses favorable institution factors and argues against discretionary denial.
Detailed Summary
In IPR2025-00860, Google LLC seeks inter partes review of U.S. Patent No. 10,924,573, owned by Sandpiper CDN, LLC. The petition asserts that claims 1‑20 are anticipated by the Newton-471 publication and would have been obvious in view of three prior‑art references: Dilley, Pai, and Wang. Google argues that the prior art predates the patent’s priority date, that the Board should not exercise discretion to deny institution under §§314(a) and 325(d), and highlights favorable institution factors such as limited litigation resources and lack of parallel proceedings. The petition includes a declaration from Dr. Todd Mowry and requests that the Board institute the review and find all challenged claims unpatentable.
Practitioner Note
This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in Google LLC vs Sandpiper CDN, LLC is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
Apple Inc.vsSmith Interface Technologies, LLC
Apple Inc. successfully petitioned to challenge Smith Interface Technologies' patent on gesture recognition, leading to the institution of IPR proceedings. The Board found sufficient evidence that the claims are obvious over a combination of prior art references Ahn and Chaudhri.
Snap Inc. et al.vsNokia Technologies Oy
Hisense USA Corporation and Nokia Technologies Oy have settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 7,532,808 and jointly request the Board to keep the settlement agreement confidential and terminate the proceeding as to Hisense.
Atrius Development Group Corp.vsABC IP, LLC et al.
The PTAB denied institution of IPR2025-01473 for Atrius Development Group Corp. against ABC IP, LLC because the petitioner failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on any challenged claims.
Valneva Austria GMBHvsTakeda Vaccines, Inc.
Valneva has filed an IPR petition challenging all 67 claims of Takeda’s Zika vaccine patent, asserting anticipation and obviousness over multiple prior‑art references. The petitioner argues the examiner erred and that no discretionary bars apply, seeking cancellation of the entire patent.
Micron Technology, Inc. et al.vsYangtze Memory Technologies Company, Ltd.
Micron Technology successfully secured institution in this IPR against Yangtze Memory Technologies regarding 3D NAND memory claims. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of obviousness over Park et al., despite the Patent Owner's challenges to key claim terms like 'trenches.'
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.