Short Summary
LG Electronics has filed an IPR petition challenging all 19 claims of Maxell’s ’072 video‑editing patent, asserting that five prior‑art references render the claims obvious. The petition argues against discretionary denial and cites a prior Board decision that found similar claims unpatentable.
Detailed Summary
In Petition IPR2025-00394, LG Electronics Inc. and its U.S. affiliate seek inter partes review of every claim of Maxell Ltd.’s U.S. Patent No. 10,199,072, which covers an editing method and a recording/reproducing device for managing video data. The petition relies on five pre‑critical‑date references—Bryant, Kaplan, Sporer, Horn, and a combination thereof—to argue that each claim is obvious under 35 U.S.C. §103. It also contends that discretionary denial under §§325(d) and 314(a) is unwarranted, pointing to a prior Board decision (IPR2018-01432) that found the same subject matter unpatentable. The filing is timely, and no settlement or joint termination is indicated. The petition is pending institution by 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 LG Electronics Inc. et al. vs Maxell, LTD. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al.vsEmpire Technology Development LLC
Samsung has filed a Director Review request to overturn a PTAB denial of institution for its wireless‑channel‑estimation patent, arguing procedural and substantive errors.
Ericsson Inc. et al.vsGeneral Access Solutions, Ltd.
Ericsson Inc. is challenging General Access Solutions, Ltd.'s patent (7230931) in a PTAB petition based on obviousness (103). The petitioner asserts that the claims are rendered obvious by various combinations of prior art references, including Vornefeld, Atsuta, and Youssefmir, within the context of SDMA/TDD systems.
INTELLIGENT PROTECTION MANAGEMENT CORP.vsCisco Technology, Inc., et al.
Intelligent Protection Management Corp. has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of all 20 claims of Cisco’s ’293 video‑superposition patent, arguing they are obvious over the Tysso system and a GIMP user manual. The petition cites detailed expert testimony and prior‑art references to support the unpatentability argument.
Zhuhai CosMX Battery Co., Ltd.vsNingde Amperex Technology Ltd.
The PTAB denied Zhuhai CosMX Battery’s request for Director Review of the institution denial in IPR2025‑00385 concerning battery patent 10,964,927. The denial leaves the original decision that the IPR was not instituted intact.
Mercedes-Benz Group AG et al.vsPhelan Group, LLC
Mercedes-Benz and Phelan Group settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 10,259,470 B2 before trial, leading the PTAB to terminate the proceeding and keep the settlement confidential.
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.