Short Summary
Google and Motorola settled their IPR dispute with Multifold over U.S. Patent 9,792,007 B2. The Board granted a joint motion to terminate the proceeding and ordered the settlement agreements kept confidential.
Detailed Summary
In IPR2025-00061, Google LLC and Motorola Mobility LLC jointly moved to terminate the inter partes review of Multifold International’s U.S. Patent 9,792,007 B2 after reaching a settlement that also resolves related district‑court litigation. The Board found good cause to terminate, noting that no merits had been decided and that the settlement agreements contain confidential business information. An order was issued terminating the IPR and directing the settlement documents to be kept separate from the public patent file and disclosed only upon a showing of good cause.
Practitioner Note
This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in Google LLC et al. vs Multifold International Incorporated Pte. Ltd. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
Linkplay Technology Inc. et al.vsSonos, Inc.
Linkplay Technology has petitioned the PTAB to invalidate Sonos’s audio playback patent (U.S. 10,853,023) by asserting anticipation and obviousness over two prior‑art references, Barbe and Richenstein. The petition also argues that discretionary denial does not apply.
The Integration Group of America, Inc.vsSitePro, Inc.
The Integration Group of Americas and SitePro entered a settlement that resolves all disputes over Patent No. 9,342,078. They jointly moved to terminate the inter partes review, citing 35 U.S.C. §317. The Board is asked to dismiss the proceeding without a final written decision.
Eunsung Global Corp.vsHydraFacial LLC et al.
Eunsung Global and HydraFacial have jointly moved to terminate IPR2025-00453 after reaching a settlement that resolves all disputes over HydraFacial's facial treatment patent.
Yangtze Memory Technologies Company, Ltd. et al.vsMicron Technology, Inc. et al.
The USPTO denied Yangtze Memory Technologies’ request for Director Review of the decision denying institution of IPR2025-00498 (patent 8,803,214). The denial also applies to three related IPRs covering the same patent.
Intel Corporation et al.vsAdvanced Cluster Systems, Inc.
Intel and AMD have filed a petition to invalidate 12,021,679, alleging that its claims are obvious over earlier MultiMATLAB publications and IBM documentation. The petition requests that the PTAB institute an IPR and cancel claims 1‑19.
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.