Executive Summary
BMW of North America has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of all 30 claims of Foras Technologies’ fault‑tolerant multiprocessor patent. The petition relies on obviousness over a combination of six prior‑art references and challenges the examiner’s earlier rejections. It also argues that discretionary denial is inappropriate.
Related Cases
Rode Microphones, LLC et al.vsZaxcom, Inc.
RØDE Microphones has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of 17 claims of Zaxcom’s ’443 patent, arguing obviousness over a combination of six prior‑art references and urging the PTAB to institute the review.
LEDUP MANUFACTURING GROUP LTD.vsSeasonal Specialties, LLC
LEDUP Manufacturing Group Ltd. filed an IPR petition challenging the validity of Seasonal Specialties' patent covering series LED circuits with bypass resistors. The petitioner argues that the claimed features are anticipated or obvious based on prior art disclosures in lighting technology.
Amphenol CorporationvsCredo Technology Group Ltd.
The ITC investigation into switchable‑connectivity phones and tablets was terminated after Ericsson and Apple reached a settlement, prompting the Commission to dismiss the case without further review.
HARMAN INTERNATIONAL INDUSTRIES, INC.vsST CasesTech, LLC et al.
Harman International Industries has filed an IPR petition challenging U.S. Patent 8,805,692, asserting that its wearable audio claims are obvious over prior art such as Jannard, Wittenberg, Relan, and Barnes. The petition argues that discretionary exclusions do not apply and requests the Board to institute the review.
Palo Alto Networks, Inc.vsCroga Innovations Ltd.
Palo Alto Networks petitions the PTAB to invalidate Croga Innovations’ ’601 patent, arguing that its claims are obvious over a suite of prior‑art references covering content isolation and proxy authentication for collaboration software.
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.