Meta Platforms, Inc. v. COGMEDIA LLC

IPR2026-00247

Meta Platforms has filed a petition to invalidate Cogmedia’s ’562 patent covering social‑card interfaces, asserting that the claims are obvious over a suite of earlier patents. The petition challenges 14 claims and seeks institution of the IPR.

Jurisdiction
US PTAB
Case Number
IPR2026-00247
Decision Date
18 March 2026
Filing Date
18 March 2026

Detailed Summary

In a petition for inter partes review, Meta Platforms, Inc. challenges U.S. Patent No. 9,817,562 owned by Cogmedia LLC. The petition targets claims 1‑3, 5‑8, 11‑15, 17 and 18, asserting that the claimed methods for presenting user‑generated content cards with voting, instant messaging, geographic indicators and other collaborative features were already disclosed in prior patents such as McQueen, Forsyth, Csaszar, Briggs, Rieger, Knapp and Colas. Citing KSR and other case law, Meta argues that a person of ordinary skill would have found it obvious to combine these references, and therefore requests the PTAB to 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 Meta Platforms, Inc. vs COGMEDIA LLC is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.

Related Cases

patentIPR2024-01337

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al.vsHeadwater Research LLC

Samsung has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate all 30 claims of Headwater Research’s ’110 patent on data‑usage billing. The petition relies on a combination of prior‑art references to argue obviousness under §103 and argues against discretionary denial. A stipulation not to pursue the same issues in parallel district‑court litigation is also included.

patentIPR2025-00799

Intas Pharmaceuticals, Ltd. et al.vsAtossa Therapeutics, Inc.

Intas Pharmaceuticals successfully secured the institution of IPR against Atossa Therapeutics over a drug polymorph patent (11,261,151), challenging claims based on anticipation and obviousness using prior art Liu.

patentIPR2025-00137

Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless et al.vsPegasus Wireless Innovation LLC

Verizon and co‑petitioners seek to invalidate a 5G resource‑allocation patent owned by Pegasus Wireless, arguing the claims are obvious over prior‑art standards and publications. The petition requests the PTAB to institute the IPR and cancel all 20 challenged claims.

patentIPR2025-00631

Revvo Technologies, Inc.vsTire Stickers LLC et al.

The PTAB denied institution of an IPR in a dispute involving Tire Stickers LLC and Revvo Technologies, citing Petitioner's failure to justify inconsistent claim construction positions across different legal venues.

patentPGR2025-00030

Merck Sharp & Dohme LLCvsHalozyme, Inc. et al.

Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC successfully petitioned for institution in a PGR proceeding against Halozyme, Inc., challenging the '758 patent on grounds of enablement and obviousness. The Board adopted a broad claim construction for 'modified PH20 polypeptide,' which significantly broadened the scope of the challenged claims.

Arctic Invent — IP Strategy

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.

Talk to our patent team →

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.

Strategy Consult

Facing a similar patent matter?

Arctic's litigation team uses precedent data like this to build winning arguments.

Get a Strategy Call