ASUSTek Computer Inc. v. VideoLabs, Inc.

IPR2025-00304

ASUS filed a motion to withdraw its IPR petition against VideoLabs' patent after related Roku IPRs were settled, rendering its joinder motions moot. The Board will decide on the withdrawal request.

Jurisdiction
US PTAB
Case Number
IPR2025-00304
Decision Date
17 December 2024
Filing Date
17 December 2024

Detailed Summary

In IPR2025-00304, ASUSTek Computer Inc. moved to withdraw its petition challenging VideoLabs, Inc.'s U.S. Patent No. 8,291,236. The request follows the termination of three related Roku IPRs (IPR2024-01023 to -01025) after a settlement, which the Board noted makes ASUS's joinder motions moot and potentially bars the petitions under 35 U.S.C. §315(b). Citing its discretion under 37 C.F.R. §42.71(a), ASUS seeks dismissal to preserve Board resources. The motion was filed on February 27, 2025, and is pending Board action.

Practitioner Note

This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in ASUSTek Computer Inc. vs VideoLabs, Inc. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.

Related Cases

patentPGR2026-00042

Wealth, Inc.vs--

Wealth, Inc. has filed a Post‑Grant Review petition seeking cancellation of all 20 claims of Vanilla Technologies’ U.S. Patent 12,353,917, alleging ineligibility, obviousness, indefiniteness, and an improper dependent claim. The petition relies on prior‑art references Racanelli, Bateman, Dintenfass, McMillen and Kwak.

patentIPR2026-00325

Microsoft CorporationvsQomplx LLC

Microsoft has filed an IPR petition challenging 16 claims of Qomplx’s U.S. Patent 12,301,627 covering graph‑based network anomaly detection. The challenger asserts obviousness over prior‑art references Stokes, Crabtree, and Sekar under 35 U.S.C. §103.

patentIPR2026-00297

Microsoft CorporationvsToutVirtual, Inc.

Microsoft has filed an IPR petition challenging all 20 claims of ToutVirtual’s ‘667 patent covering virtual system management, asserting obviousness over multiple prior‑art references.

patentIPR2026-00187

Cisco Systems, Inc.vsGOLDEN EYE TECHNOLOGIES LLC

Cisco has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate claims 1‑3 and 13‑15 of Golden Eye Technologies' 9,717,037 patent. The challenger argues the claims are obvious over earlier Wi‑Fi standards and patents (Choudhary, Hasty, Chen). The petition requests the Board to institute the review and cancel the challenged claims.

patentIPR2026-00186

Cisco Systems, Inc.vsGolden Eye Technologies LLC

Cisco has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate claims 1‑4 and 9‑11 of Golden Eye’s ’556 Wi‑Fi scanning patent, arguing that the claims are obvious over three earlier patents. The petition emphasizes that the patent was allowed despite acknowledging the same prior‑art concepts.

patentIPR2026-00334

Pinterest, Inc.vs--

Pinterest has filed an IPR petition challenging all 20 claims of OpenTV’s ’703 patent, asserting that the claims are obvious over prior art such as Orr, Hsu, Lim, and Hervey.

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