Short Summary
HPE and Cisco settled their IPR with Cobblestone Wireless over U.S. Patent 7,924,802, leading the PTAB to terminate the proceeding and keep the settlement confidential.
Detailed Summary
In IPR2024-00707, Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company and Cisco Systems, Inc. jointly moved to terminate the inter partes review of Cobblestone Wireless LLC's U.S. Patent 7,924,802 after reaching a settlement that resolves all disputes. The parties also requested that the settlement agreements be treated as business‑confidential information. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board, noting that no merits decision had been rendered, granted the joint motion to terminate and ordered the settlement documents to be kept confidential, effectively ending the proceeding without a final written decision on patent validity.
Practitioner Note
This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company et al. vs Cobblestone Wireless LLC is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
fuboTV Media Inc.vsDISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.
The PTAB held 16 of the 25 challenged claims of DISH’s adaptive‑rate streaming patent unpatentable as obvious over Ogdon and Allen, with two additional claims invalidated over Ogdon, Allen, and SMIL 2.0. The remaining nine claims were upheld.
Dabico Airport Solutions Inc. et al.vsAXA POWER APS et al.
AXA Power defends the USPTO Director's discretionary denial of Dabico's IPR petition, arguing the Director acted within broad authority under 35 U.S.C. § 314(a) and applied a holistic assessment. The Patent Owner contends the petitioner misapplies the review standard and seeks denial of the request for Director Review.
Orca Security Ltd.vsWiz, Inc.
Orca Security and Wiz settled their inter partes review dispute and filed a joint motion to terminate the proceeding. The PTAB is expected to grant termination as no final written decision has been issued.
Tesla Inc.vsGranite Vehicle Ventures LLC
Tesla has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate 16 claims of a self‑driving vehicle patent owned by Granite Vehicle Ventures. The petition alleges obviousness over a suite of prior‑art references. The case is pending institution.
Bicara Therapeutics, Inc.vsThe John Hopkins University et al.
Bicara Therapeutics has filed a PTAB Post‑Grant Review petition seeking cancellation of all nine claims of Johns Hopkins' 2025 antibody‑fusion protein patent, alleging lack of written description, lack of enablement, and improper claim dependency.
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.