Short Summary
Shopify has filed an IPR petition challenging all 20 claims of U.S. Patent 11,455,678, asserting obviousness over multiple prior‑art references. The petition argues the examiner overlooked key references and that discretionary denial is unwarranted.
Detailed Summary
Shopify Inc. filed Petition IPR2025-00130 seeking inter partes review of all twenty claims of U.S. Patent No. 11,455,678, which covers a server‑based system for generating and distributing product‑listing widgets in electronic commerce and social networks. The petitioner asserts three grounds of obviousness under 35 U.S.C. §103: (1) claims 1‑20 are obvious over the Johnston publication; (2) claims 1‑4, 7‑12, and 15‑18 are obvious over the combination of Wiser and Dierks; and (3) claims 5, 6, 13, 14, 19, and 20 are obvious over Wiser, Dierks, and Chang. Shopify contends the examiner materially erred by not considering these references, that the petition is not cumulative of an ongoing ex parte reexamination, and that discretionary denial under § 325(d) is not warranted. The petition also cites relevant case law on material error and discretionary denial. No decision on institution has been made yet.
Practitioner Note
This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in Shopify Inc. vs DKR Consulting LLC is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
Tesla, Inc.vsPerceptive Automata LLC
Tesla has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of all 23 claims of Perceptive Automata’s autonomous‑vehicle patent, asserting that the claims are obvious over prior‑art machine‑learning and sensor‑fusion publications such as Djuric, Zhu, Cox, and Ross.
Quotient Technology, LLC et al.vsIntelligent Clearing Network Inc. et al.
Quotient Technology and Intelligent Clearing Network settled their dispute over patents 9,070,133 and 9,098,855, leading the PTAB to terminate both inter partes reviews. The settlement agreement was deemed confidential business information.
Resonac Hard Disk Corporation et al.vsMR TECHNOLOGIES GMBH
Resonac has filed an IPR petition challenging 15 claims of MR Technologies' 9,928,864 patent covering multilayer perpendicular magnetic recording media, asserting that the claims are obvious over Takenoiri and other prior art.
Dolby Laboratories, Inc. et al.vsInterDigital Madison Patent Holdings, SAS et al.
Dolby Laboratories has filed an IPR petition challenging U.S. Patent 9,185,268, which covers methods for color correcting display content. The petition asserts that the claims are obvious over a combination of prior‑art references and requests the Board to institute the review.
TankLogix, LLCvsSitePro, Inc.
TankLogix, LLC's IPR petition against SitePro, Inc.'s patent was denied by the PTAB, finding insufficient evidence to support anticipation or obviousness challenges. The Board determined that TankLogix failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on the record regarding claims related to fluid handling and industrial control systems.
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.