Short Summary
Samsung Display files a response defending the PTAB’s institution of its IPR against Pictiva’s request for Director Review. The petitioner emphasizes that the Sotera stipulation and prior guidance make a discretionary denial inappropriate.
Detailed Summary
In a petitioner's response to a Director Review request, Samsung Display Co., Ltd. argues that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board correctly exercised its discretion under 35 U.S.C. § 314(a) by refusing to deny institution of IPR2024-01187 concerning U.S. Patent No. 9,257,492. The brief contends that the rescinded Fintiv guidance memo should not retroactively affect the institution decision, especially since the patent owner abandoned its Fintiv arguments. Samsung highlights a Sotera stipulation, previously deemed dispositive, and cites consistent PTAB rulings in related IPRs to support its position that the institution should stand.
Practitioner Note
This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in Samsung Display Co., Ltd. et al. vs Pictiva Displays International Ltd. et al. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
TESLA, INC.vsiQar Inc.
Tesla sought a Director Review of the USPTO's institution of iQar's patent 10,850,616. The Board denied the request, leaving the institution in place.
United Services Automobile AssociationvsAuto Telematics Ltd.
USAA defends the institution of an IPR against Auto Telematics, arguing the patent owner waived procedural arguments and that the ’728 vehicle‑data‑logging patent is obvious over multiple prior‑art references.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al.vsMassively Broadband LLC
Samsung Electronics has filed an IPR petition challenging all 39 claims of Massively Broadband’s U.S. Patent 10,224,999, asserting that the claims are obvious over a combination of six prior‑art references.
Regions BankvsUnited Services Automobile Association
The PTAB granted institution for the IPR challenge (IPR2025-01326) brought by Regions Bank against United Services Automobile Association's patent 12159310.
Kangxi Communication Technologies (Shanghai) Co., Ltd.vsSKYWORKS SOLUTIONS, INC.
Kangxi Communication Technologies has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate claims 1‑11 of Skyworks’ 9,148,194 RF switch patent, asserting obviousness over the Huang and Seshimo references. The petition also argues that discretionary denial is inappropriate.
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.