Short Summary
Samsung has filed a PGR petition seeking to invalidate Oura’s wearable‑ring patent (US 11,868,178) on grounds of obviousness over multiple prior‑art references and §112 indefiniteness.
Detailed Summary
In a petition for post‑grant review (PGR2024‑00030), Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. request the PTAB to institute a review of all 18 claims of Oura Health Oy’s U.S. Patent No. 11,868,178, which covers a finger‑worn wearable ring device. The petitioner alleges that the claims are obvious in view of a combination of prior‑art references—Schröder, Niwa, Mestas, and Yuen—and that claims 11, 17, and 18 fail to meet the definiteness and dependency requirements of 35 U.S.C. §112. Samsung also argues that the Board should not deny institution under §325(d) or §314(a) because the cited art was not meaningfully considered during prosecution. No institution decision has been made, and the proceeding remains at the petition stage.
Practitioner Note
This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. vs Oura Health Oy et al. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
North Sails Group, LLCvsTeam New Zealand Limited et al.
North Sails has filed a post‑grant review petition challenging Team New Zealand’s high‑performance sail patent (US 12,110,089). The petitioner alleges anticipation, obviousness, indefiniteness, lack of enablement and insufficient written description, citing a range of prior‑art references and prior sales. The PTAB has yet to rule on the petition.
Apple Inc.vsHBCU Messaging US LP
Apple’s petition challenges Samsung’s IPR against Wilus’s ’077 Wi‑Fi patent. Wilus seeks Director Review, arguing settled expectations and Samsung’s inconsistent indefiniteness positions merit denial of institution. The Board had previously instituted the IPR.
LG Energy Solution, Ltd.vsMolecular Rebar Design, LLC
The PTAB affirmed all claims of LG Energy Solution’s lithium‑ion battery patent after finding the challenger’s obviousness arguments unsupported. The Board emphasized that Ohata’s masterbatch embeds carbon nanotubes, preventing the required ionic attachment, and rejected the petitioner’s speculation about resin removal.
Stingray Group Inc. et al.vsHernandez-Mondragon, Edwin et al.
Court decision.
Phison Electronics CorporationvsVervain, LLC
The PTAB denied Phison Electronics' request to institute a post‑grant review of six claims of its mixed‑level NAND flash memory patent, finding the petitioner had not shown any claim likely unpatentable.
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.