Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. v. Mullen Industries LLC

Generac Power Systems Inc. et al.vsChampion Power Equipment, Inc.

Generac, Harbor Freight and MWE have petitioned the PTAB to invalidate Champion Power’s dual‑fuel generator patent (U.S. 10,697,398). The petition alleges anticipation and obviousness over multiple prior‑art references and seeks cancellation of 45 claims.

Sony CorporationvsOptimum Imaging Technologies LLC

Sony Corporation filed an Inter Partes Review petition challenging claims of the '805 patent held by Optimum Imaging Technologies LLC. The petitioner argues that the claimed automated image distortion correction is obvious when combining references like Watanabe, Takane, and Russ. This challenges the validity of key imaging technology patents in the digital image processing space.

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al.vsEmpire Technology Development LLC

Empire Technology Development LLC seeks Director Review of the PTAB’s decision that claims 25‑28 of its 8,798,120 patent are unpatentable. The owner argues the Board misapplied the district court’s claim construction and relied on unsupported prior art. Samsung Electronics is the challenger.

Roku, Inc.vsVideoLabs, Inc.

Roku, Inc. successfully convinced the PTAB to institute its challenge against VideoLabs' patent claims under 35 U.S.C. § 102 (Anticipation). The Board found sufficient support for anticipation over prior art 'Russ,' while denying institution on obviousness grounds.

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al.vsNetlist, Inc.

Samsung successfully challenged claim 16 of Netlist’s ’912 memory‑module patent, with the PTAB finding the claim obvious over the Ellsberry reference and unpatentable.