Short Summary
TSMC and Apple have filed an IPR petition challenging MYW Semitech’s 11,538,763 chip‑package patent, asserting that all 23 claims are obvious over multiple prior‑art references. The petition seeks to invalidate the patent before the PTAB.
Detailed Summary
In Petition for Inter Partes Review IPR2026-00066, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Ltd. (TSMC) and Apple Inc. challenge U.S. Patent No. 11,538,763 owned by MYW Semitech, LLC. The petition alleges that claims 1‑23 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious in view of a suite of prior‑art references, including Sundaram, Lin‑191, Lin‑863, Lin‑691, Shenoy and Yu. The challengers argue that the patent’s claimed ranges lack criticality and that a person of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine the teachings of the references, rendering the invention obvious. No claim construction is required because the prior art falls within the scope of the claims under any reasonable interpretation. The petition is pending before the PTAB.
Practitioner Note
This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Ltd. et al. vs MYW Semitech, LLC is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al.vsOuraring, Inc. et al.
The PTAB has instituted the IPR against Ouraring, Inc. et al., finding a reasonable likelihood of prevailing for Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. on multiple grounds of obviousness (103). The institution decision targets 17 claims related to smart rings and biometric monitoring technology.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al.vsCM HK LIMITED
Samsung Electronics successfully navigated a PTAB institution challenge against CM HK LIMITED regarding motion sensing technology. The Board found reasonable likelihood of prevailing on key claims based on obviousness (103).
Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. et al.vsMobile Data Technologies LLC
The USPTO denied Samsung’s request for Director Review of the institution decisions in multiple IPRs, including the case involving Mobile Data Technologies’ patent 8,793,336. The denial leaves the institution decisions unchanged.
Ericsson Inc. et al.vsXR COMMUNICATIONS LLC
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision rejecting the petitioner's contentions that the patent was unpatentable over Agee or in combination with Butler. The Board found Petitioner failed to meet its burden of proof, specifically regarding how prior art disclosed critical signal processing limitations.
ADC Solutions Auto LLC et al.vsThe Noco Company
The PTAB granted ADC Solutions Auto’s petition to institute inter partes review of The Noco Company’s 11,584,243 B2 jump‑starter patent, finding a reasonable likelihood of unpatentability for several claims.
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.