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

Merck Sharp & Dohme LLCvsHalozyme, Inc. et al.

Halozyme seeks Director Review to overturn the PTAB’s institution of a post‑grant review against its hyaluronidase patent, arguing filing‑date errors, improper claim construction, and Fintiv factors favoring denial.

Charter Communications, Inc. et al.vsTouchstream Technologies, Inc.

Charter Communications initiated an IPR challenging Touchstream Technologies' patent on media playback systems, arguing the claims are obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The challenge centers on combining prior art references like Danciu and Mahajan to show predictable results in command translation.

Jesco Lighting Group, LLCvsAGS Lighting Management, LLC

Jesco Lighting Group has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of all 20 claims of AGS Lighting Management’s linear LED lighting patent, asserting obviousness over multiple prior‑art references. The petition details four grounds, each pairing Edwards, Sadwick, Jeswani, and May to show the claimed features were well‑known.

Vicor CorporationvsDelta Electronics, Inc.

Vicor Corporation has filed a Director Review request challenging the Board’s denial to institute an IPR on Delta Electronics’ 10,877,534 patent covering stacked power converters. The petitioner contends the Board relied on unsupported expert testimony contrary to prior art.

AT&T Mobility LLC et al.vsDaingean Technologies Ltd.

AT&T Mobility LLC failed to secure institution in an IPR against Daingean Technologies regarding 5G cellular communications claims. The Board denied the petition because AT&T could not demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on unpatentability, particularly concerning specific claim constructions related to RNTI and information types.