Short Summary
FormFactor and Technoprobe settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 11,035,885 B2. The Board granted a joint motion to terminate the IPR and kept the settlement agreement confidential.
Detailed Summary
In IPR2024-00933 concerning U.S. Patent 11,035,885 B2, FormFactor, Inc. and Technoprobe S.p.A. reached a settlement that resolved all outstanding issues. The parties filed a joint motion and request to treat the settlement agreement as confidential business information. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board found good cause to terminate the inter partes review under 35 U.S.C. § 317 and ordered the settlement agreement to remain confidential, effectively ending the proceeding.
Practitioner Note
This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in FormFactor, Inc. vs Technoprobe S.p.A. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
GENERAC POWER SYSTEMS, INC. et al.vsChampion Power Equipment, Inc.
Generac, Harbor Freight, and MWE settled their IPR against Champion Power's dual‑fuel selector switch patent. They filed a joint request to keep the settlement agreement confidential under statutory provisions.
Apple Inc.vsAdvanced Coding Technologies LLC
Apple has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate claims 1‑9 of Advanced Coding Technologies' 2010 voice‑coding patent, arguing the claims are obvious over a combination of prior‑art references.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al.vsSiOnyx, LLC
Samsung Electronics and SiOnyx settled their dispute, leading the PTAB to terminate the inter partes review of U.S. Patent No. 10,224,359 before institution. The settlement agreements were ordered confidential.
Biofrontera Incorporated et al.vsSun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc.
Biofrontera's IPR challenge against Sun Pharmaceutical regarding photodynamic therapy illuminators was instituted by the PTAB. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on obviousness grounds over Lundahl and Larsen, focusing on combining prior art elements for flexible device design.
Cisco Systems, Inc.vsDynamic Mesh Networks, Inc.
Cisco Systems, Inc. filed a response to Dynamic Mesh Networks’ request for director review, stating it takes no position and defers to the Director’s discretion.
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.