Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC v. Halozyme, Inc. et al.

PGR2025-00050

Merck has filed a post‑grant review petition challenging Halozyme’s U.S. Patent 12,077,791 covering modified PH20 hyaluronidase proteins. The petition asserts that the claims are overly broad and lack both written description and enablement under 35 U.S.C. §112(a). Merck seeks institution of the proceeding and cancellation of all claims.

Jurisdiction
US PTAB
Case Number
PGR2025-00050
Filing Date
5 July 2025
Status
ok

Related Cases

patentIPR2026-00134

Westinghouse Air Brake Technologies Corporation et al.vsRailware, Inc. et al.

Wabtec has filed an IPR petition challenging Railware’s RE 47835 patent covering railway block‑and‑unblock code systems. The petition asserts obviousness over the FRA‑Report and several secret‑code references.

patentIPR2025-01253

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. et al.vsOMNI MEDSCI, INC.

Apple’s IPR against Omni MedSci’s ‘533 patent resulted in all challenged claims being found unpatentable. The Board held that the claims were obvious over prior‑art references Lisogurski, Carlson, and Mannheimer.

patentIPR2026-00105

Apple Inc.vsHBCU MESSAGING US LP

Apple seeks director review to overturn the PTAB’s institution of an IPR against Samsung’s Wi‑Fi patents, contending the Board misapplied the “diverse subject‑matter” test and ignored Samsung’s inconsistent indefiniteness positions.

patentIPR2024-01052

Arashi Vision Inc. (d/b/a Insta360)vsGoPro, Inc.

The PTAB institution decision found a reasonable likelihood of prevailing for the petitioner, Arashi Vision Inc., against GoPro, Inc. on multiple grounds under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The Board agreed with the Petitioner's interpretation of key claim terms related to video processing and stabilization technology.

patentIPR2024-01003

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al.vsStaton Techiya, LLC

Samsung and Staton Techiya have settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 11,710,473 and jointly moved to terminate the proceeding, requesting the settlement be kept confidential.

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