Short Summary
Tableau Software has filed a request for Director Review to overturn the PTAB’s denial of institution of an IPR against its interactive‑chart patent. The petition contends the Board erred on claim constructions, the disclosure of a second website, and motivation to combine prior art references.
Detailed Summary
In IPR2024-01388, Tableau Software seeks Director Review of the PTAB’s decision to deny institution of an inter partes review of U.S. Patent No. 9,712,595, which claims methods for generating interactive charts and publishing them on a second website. The petitioner relies on two sets of obviousness grounds—one based on the Rostoker reference (combined with Jou) and another on QlikView—arguing that the Board’s narrow construction of “interactive chart,” its finding that Rostoker does not disclose a second website, and its rejection of motivation to combine references are material errors. The dissenting opinion is cited as evidence of a reasonable likelihood of success. The petition requests reversal of the denial so the case can proceed to trial.
Practitioner Note
This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in Tableau Software, LLC et al. vs iCharts LLC is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
Solventum CorporationvsM.E.A.C. Engineering Ltd.
Solventum Corp. filed an unopposed motion to keep its settlement with M.E.A.C. Engineering confidential under federal rules, also seeking termination of the IPR.
Nyxoah, Inc. et al.vsInspire Medical Systems, Inc.
Nyxoah has filed an IPR petition challenging Inspire Medical Systems' patent on hypoglossal nerve stimulation for sleep‑disordered breathing, asserting obviousness over multiple prior‑art references.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al.vsGenghisComm Holdings, LLC
Samsung has filed an IPR petition challenging 18 claims of GenghisComm’s ’508 patent, asserting anticipation and obviousness over Shattil-537 and secondary references Doufexi and Lucent. The petition argues strong merits and cites Fintiv factors to oppose discretionary denial.
Toyota Motor Corporation et al.vsBUNKER HILL TECHNOLOGIES, LLC
Toyota has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate Bunker Hill’s U.S. Patent 10,549,648 covering hybrid‑electric vehicle propulsion. The challenger alleges anticipation and obviousness over three prior‑art references and requests cancellation of all 20 claims.
UNION ELECTRIC COMPANY et al.vsMES, Inc.
Union Electric Company has filed an IPR petition challenging MES’s 10,933,370 patent on mercury‑removal methods, asserting lack of written description and obviousness over six prior‑art references. The petition seeks institution and cancellation of claims 1‑6, 8, 11, 14‑15.
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.