• Pgr2025-00080Institution denied
  PTAB · Feb 3, 2026 · PGR2025-00080 · APJ John A Squires · PGR · Director review

  The Director denied institution of PGR2025-00080 after reviewing discretionary considerations.

  RulingsDirector review decision

  • Settled expectationsInstitution denied settled expectationsInstitution denied

    “NOTICE Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 314(a) and § 324(a), after review of discretionary considerations, institution of inter partes review or post-grant review is denied in the following proceedings: IPR2025-01510 IPR2026-00016 IPR2026-00035 IPR2025-01563 IPR2026-00019 IPR2026-00040 IPR2025-01596 IPR2026-00022 IPR2026-00041 IPR2025-01605 IPR2026-00023 IPR2026-00042 IPR2026-00008 IPR2026-00024 IPR2026-00043 IPR2026-00014 IPR2026-00031 PGR2025-00080 IPR2026-00015 IPR2026-00032” slip op. at 1

  Discretionary denial
  Patents in suitUS 12,268,265
• Pgr2025-00064Institution denied
  PTAB · Dec 1, 2025 · PGR2025-00064 · APJ John A Squires · PGR · Director review

  The Director discretionarily denied institution of PGR2025-00064 after reviewing discretionary considerations.

  RulingsDirector review decision

  • PTAB / AIA Trials › Discretionary denialDenied

    “NOTICE Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 314(a) and § 324(a), after review of discretionary considerations, institution of inter partes review or post-grant review is denied in the following proceedings: IPR2025-01095* IPR2025-01213 IPR2025-01361 IPR2025-01100* IPR2025-01249 PGR2025-00063 IPR2025-01120* IPR2025-01344 PGR2025-00064 * Although previously referred, this case is now discretionarily denied in view of Revvo Technologies, Inc. v. Cerebrum Sensor Technologies, Inc., IPR2025-00632, Paper 20 (Squires Nov. 3, 2025) (precedential).” slip op. at 1

  Discretionary denial
  Patents in suitUS 12,193,790

Holdings, summaries, rulings, issues, outcomes, winners and claim constructions shown for a decision were generated by a large language model reading the opinion. They are a guide to the decision, not the decision. Confirm every one against the court's own text before relying on it. Outcomes read from the patent owner’s side. Party names are extracted from the decision and are missing on about 900 short Director denials and scans, which carry the trial number instead.