Short Summary
Shenzhen Root Technology Co., Ltd. has filed a Petition challenging U.S. Patent No. 11,413,380 held by Chiaro Technology Ltd. The challenge centers on obviousness (Section 103), arguing that the claimed features of the breast pump are combinations of existing prior art references like Chang, Weber, and Guthrie.
Detailed Summary
Shenzhen Root Technology Co., Ltd. filed a Petition challenging U.S. Patent No. 11,413,380 held by Chiaro Technology Ltd. The petition asserts that numerous claims related to breast pump technology are obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The petitioner presents two main grounds: one combining Chang, Weber, and Guthrie to show motivation for combination in certain claim sets (Ground 1A), and a broader ground utilizing all four references—Chang, Weber, Guthrie, and Khalil—to demonstrate obviousness across various limitations (Ground 1B).
Practitioner Note
This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in SHENZHEN ROOT TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD. et al. vs Chiaro Technology Ltd. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
Tempus AI, Inc.vsGuardant Health Inc.
TwinStrand Biosciences petitions the PTAB to invalidate Guardant Health’s 11,149,306 patent covering cfDNA sequencing methods, asserting that the claims are obvious over prior art such as Narayan and Schmitt. The petition also alleges examiner misdirection by Guardant. The case is pending institution.
CADENCE DESIGN SYSTEMS, INC.vsSemiconductor Design Technologies, LLC
Cadence Design Systems and Semiconductor Design Technologies settled their IPR dispute over patent 7,603,636, leading the PTAB to terminate the proceeding without a final written decision.
DR. FALK PHARMA GMBHvsEllodi Pharmaceuticals LP
Dr. Falk Pharma GmbH initiated an IPR challenge against Ellodi Pharmaceuticals LP concerning a patent covering oral/topical drug delivery systems. The petition asserts that the challenged claims are obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103, citing prior art references including Dohil and Grother.
Amazon.com, Inc. et al.vsNL Giken Inc.
Amazon and its affiliates settled the IPR against NL Giken over U.S. Patent 9,948,968. The Board granted the joint motion to terminate, treating the settlement as confidential. The proceeding is now closed.
Google LLCvs--
Google LLC has initiated a Petition challenging U.S. Patent No. 8,825,787 held by Songbird Tech, LLC. The petitioner argues that the patent claims covering voice messaging and web communication systems are unpatentable under both 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103. This challenge targets fundamental components like audio encoding/decoding and browser-resident applications.
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.