Short Summary
Capital One filed an unopposed motion to terminate IPR 2024-00878 and to keep the settlement with Implicit, LLC confidential under statutory authority. The Board is asked to treat the settlement as business confidential information and end the proceeding.
Detailed Summary
In IPR2024-00878 concerning U.S. Patent No. 7,774,740, Capital One, National Association submitted an unopposed motion to terminate the inter partes review and to have the settlement agreement with Implicit, LLC treated as business confidential information. Citing 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c), the petitioner argues that the settlement is timely filed, the patent owner has not appeared, and confidentiality is warranted. The motion includes a confidential exhibit of the settlement and requests that it be kept separate from the public patent file, available only to government agencies or parties showing 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 Capital One, National Association vs -- is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al.vsRadian Memory Systems LLC
Samsung Electronics and Radian Memory Systems settled their IPR disputes before trial, resulting in the termination of seven pending IPRs, including IPR2025-01350 covering patent 11,740,801.
LifeScan, Inc. et al.vsCellspin Soft, Inc.
LifeScan, Senseonics and Ascensia have filed a petition to institute an IPR against Cellspin Soft’s 8,904,030 patent, asserting that the claims are obvious over several Bluetooth‑related prior arts and lack priority. The petition also cites discretionary factors favoring institution.
Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. et al.vsMaxell, Ltd.
Samsung has filed an IPR petition challenging Maxell’s 8,471,950 camera‑control patent, asserting that three earlier imaging patents render all 15 claims obvious under 35 U.S.C. §103.
Google LLCvsCellular South Inc
The USPTO denied Google’s request for Director Review of the institution denial in IPR2025-00875, keeping the challenge against Cellular South’s patent alive.
PacifiCorp et al.vsMES, Inc.
PacifiCorp and its affiliates have petitioned the PTAB to invalidate U.S. Patent 10,926,218, which covers mercury removal from coal‑fired power plant flue gas. The petition alleges anticipation and obviousness over several prior‑art references and argues lack of written‑description support for key claim limitations. The Board has yet to decide whether to institute the IPR.
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.