PTAB
Advanced fields
12 decisions · 475msnewest first
  • PTAB · May 7, 2025 · IPR2021-00906 · APJ Jameson Lee · IPR · Remand

    On remand, the Board denied the motion to amend with proposed substitute claims 69, 70, 77, and 78 because the ’872 application did not provide written-description support.

    RulingsRemand decision
    • RemandOther

      “for the Federal Circuit. Papers 75–78. On February 3, 2025, the Federal Circuit issued a decision in which it stated: “We vacate and remand the Board’s decision with regard to claims 69 and 77, and their dependent claims, but otherwise affirm.” Paper 80.3 The formal mandate from the Federal Circuit was issued on March 12, 2025. Paper 79.” slip op. at 3

    • 112 supportMotion to amend, deniedDenied

      “Per the Federal Circuit’s instruction, the “first message” must come before the “another message” and “message preceding the another message.” However, the “first message” identified by Patent Owner, i.e., the RRC Connection Setup message, occurs after what Patent Owner identifies as the “another message,” i.e., the RRC Connection Request message. That mismatching sequence is evident from Figure 15 reproduced above.” slip op. at 8

    None
    Patents in suitUS 7,580,388
  • PTAB · Jun 26, 2014 · IPR2014-00560 · APJ Hyun J Jung · IPR · Order

    The Board granted the parties’ joint motion and terminated IPR2014-00560 without a final written decision.

    RulingsOther
    • PTAB / AIA Trials › Other PTAB motions (exclude, strike, seal, additional discovery, rehearing)Granted

      “The parties stated in their joint motion that they have settled their dispute and have reached agreement to terminate this inter partes review. Paper 10, 2. Patent Owner has not yet filed a preliminary response or a waiver under 37 C.F.R. § 42.107. We are persuaded that, under these circumstances, it is appropriate to terminate this proceeding without rendering a final written decision. 37 C.F.R. § 42.72. Accordingly, it is: ORDERED that the joint motion to terminate this proceeding is GRANTED and this proceeding is hereby terminated; and” slip op. at 2

    None
    Patents in suitUS 5,592,555
  • PTAB · May 2, 2014 · IPR2014-00229 · APJ Stacey G White · IPR · Order

    The Board granted the parties’ joint motions and terminated the proceedings as to all parties without a final written decision.

    RulingsOther
    • PTAB / AIA Trials › Institution threshold (reasonable likelihood / more likely than not)Other

      “The instant proceedings are in the preliminary stage. Patent Owner has filed preliminary responses in each of the instant proceedings.5 The Board, however, has not determined whether trial will be instituted for any of the requests for inter partes review. Under 35 U.S.C. § 317(a), “[a]n inter partes review instituted under this chapter shall be terminated with respect to any petitioner upon the joint request of the petitioner and patent owner, unless the Office has decided the merits of the proceeding before the request for termination is filed.” In the motions to terminate, the parties state that they have settled their dispute with respect to the patents involved in the proceedings, and have reached agreement to terminate these proceedings. Paper 9, 1. Furthermore, the joint motion indicates that the parties have agreed to dismiss Petitioner and other real parties-in-interest identified by 2 IPR2014-00229, Paper 9; IPR2014-00230, Paper 10, IPR2014-00231, Paper 9. 3 IPR2014-00229, Ex. 1047; IPR2014-00230, Ex. 1047, IPR2014-00231, Ex. 1047. 4 IPR2014-00229, Paper 10; IPR2014-00230, Paper 11, IPR2014-00231, Paper 10. 5 IPR2014-00229, Paper 7; IPR2014-00230, Paper 8; IPR2014-00231, Paper 7.” slip op. at 2

    • PTAB / AIA Trials › Other PTAB motions (exclude, strike, seal, additional discovery, rehearing)Granted

      “The Board generally expects that a proceeding will terminate after the filing of a settlement agreement. See, e.g., Office Patent Trial Practice Guide, 77 Fed. Reg. 48,756, 48,768 (Aug. 14, 2012). Upon consideration of the parties’ arguments and the early stage of these proceedings, we agree with the parties that terminating the instant proceedings with respect to both Petitioner and Patent Owner, at this early juncture, promotes efficiency and minimizes unnecessary costs. The Board is persuaded that, under these circumstances, it is appropriate to enter judgment6 without rendering a final written decision. See 35 U.S.C. § 317(a); 37 C.F.R. § 42.72. Accordingly, it is: ORDERED that the joint motions to terminate these proceedings are granted, and that these proceedings are hereby terminated as to all parties, including Petitioner and Patent Owner;” slip op. at 3

    None
    Patents in suitUS 6,131,121
  • PTAB · May 2, 2014 · IPR2014-00230 · APJ Stacey G White · IPR · Order

    The Board granted the joint motions to terminate the proceedings as to all parties and granted the requests to keep the settlement agreement confidential.

    RulingsOther
    • Adverse judgmentAdverse judgmentGranted

      “The Board generally expects that a proceeding will terminate after the filing of a settlement agreement. See, e.g., Office Patent Trial Practice Guide, 77 Fed. Reg. 48,756, 48,768 (Aug. 14, 2012). Upon consideration of the parties’ arguments and the early stage of these proceedings, we agree with the parties that terminating the instant proceedings with respect to both Petitioner and Patent Owner, at this early juncture, promotes efficiency and minimizes unnecessary costs. The Board is persuaded that, under these circumstances, it is appropriate to enter judgment6 without rendering a final written decision. See 35 U.S.C. § 317(a); 37 C.F.R. § 42.72. Accordingly, it is: ORDERED that the joint motions to terminate these proceedings are granted, and that these proceedings are hereby terminated as to all parties, including Petitioner and Patent Owner;” slip op. at 3

    None
    Patents in suitUS 6,108,704
  • PTAB · May 2, 2014 · IPR2014-00231 · APJ Stacey G White · IPR · Order

    The Board granted the parties’ joint motions and terminated the proceedings as to all parties before deciding whether to institute review.

    RulingsOther
    • PTAB / AIA Trials › Institution threshold (reasonable likelihood / more likely than not)Not reached

      “The instant proceedings are in the preliminary stage. Patent Owner has filed preliminary responses in each of the instant proceedings.5 The Board, however, has not determined whether trial will be instituted for any of the requests for inter partes review.” slip op. at 2

    • PTAB / AIA Trials › Other PTAB motions (exclude, strike, seal, additional discovery, rehearing)Granted

      “The Board generally expects that a proceeding will terminate after the filing of a settlement agreement. See, e.g., Office Patent Trial Practice Guide, 77 Fed. Reg. 48,756, 48,768 (Aug. 14, 2012). Upon consideration of the parties’ arguments and the early stage of these proceedings, we agree with the parties that terminating the instant proceedings with respect to both Petitioner and Patent Owner, at this early juncture, promotes efficiency and minimizes unnecessary costs. The Board is persuaded that, under these circumstances, it is appropriate to enter judgment6 without rendering a final written decision. See 35 U.S.C. § 317(a); 37 C.F.R. § 42.72. Accordingly, it is: ORDERED that the joint motions to terminate these proceedings are granted, and that these proceedings are hereby terminated as to all parties, including Petitioner and Patent Owner; FURTHER ORDERED that the parties’ joint requests that the settlement agreement (Ex. 1047) be treated as business confidential information, kept separate from the file of the involved patents, and made available only to Federal 6 A judgment means a final written decision by the Board, or a termination of a proceeding. 37 C.F.R. § 42.2. Government agencies on written request, or to any person on a showing of good cause under the provisions of 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c), are granted.” slip op. at 3

    None
    Patents in suitUS 6,009,469
  • PTAB · Apr 16, 2014 · IPR2013-00435 · APJ Bryan F Moore · IPR · Order

    The Board granted the parties’ joint motion and terminated IPR2013-00435 without a final written decision after settlement.

    RulingsOther
    • PTAB / AIA Trials › Other PTAB motions (exclude, strike, seal, additional discovery, rehearing)Granted

      “proceeding, along with a true copy of their written settlement agreement, made in connection with the termination of the instant proceeding, in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(b). Paper 18; Ex. 1010. The parties also filed a joint request to have their settlement agreement treated as confidential business information under 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c). Paper 19. The joint motion to terminate indicates that the settlement agreement requires the parties to terminate this inter partes review and the related district court actions involving U.S. Patent No. 8,449,289. Paper 18 at 2.” slip op. at 2

    None
    Patents in suitUS 8,449,289
  • PTAB · Mar 25, 2014 · IPR2013-00497 · APJ Sally C Medley · IPR · Order

    The Board granted the parties’ joint motion to terminate IPR2013-00497 and terminated the proceeding without a final written decision.

    RulingsOther
    • PTAB / AIA Trials › Other PTAB motions (exclude, strike, seal, additional discovery, rehearing)Granted

      “Based on the facts of this case, it is appropriate to enter judgment1 without rendering a final written decision. See 35 U.S.C. § 317(a); 37 C.F.R. § 42.72. It is ORDERED that the joint motion to terminate IPR2013-00497 is granted; FURTHER ORDERED that the proceeding is terminated; and FURTHER ORDERED that the parties’ joint request that the settlement agreement be treated as business confidential information kept separate from the patent file, and made available only to Federal Government agencies on written request, or to any person on a showing of good cause, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c), is granted.” slip op. at 2

    None
    Patents in suitUS 8,305,840
  • PTAB · Mar 25, 2014 · IPR2013-00355 · APJ Sally C Medley · IPR · Order

    The Board granted the joint motion to terminate IPR2013-00355 and terminated the proceeding without a final written decision.

    RulingsOther
    • PTAB / AIA Trials › Institution threshold (reasonable likelihood / more likely than not)InstitutedInstituted

      “The Board instituted trial on December 12, 2013. Paper 13. At this juncture of the proceeding, the Board does not have before it full briefing on the trial issues and the Board has not entered a final decision.” slip op. at 2

    • PTAB / AIA Trials › Other PTAB motions (exclude, strike, seal, additional discovery, rehearing)Granted

      “It is ORDERED that the joint motion to terminate IPR2013-00355 is granted; FURTHER ORDERED that the proceeding is terminated; and FURTHER ORDERED that the parties’ joint request that the settlement agreement be treated as business confidential information kept separate from the patent file, and made available only to Federal Government agencies on written request, or to any person on a showing of good cause, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c), is granted.” slip op. at 2

    None
    Patents in suitUS 8,305,840
  • PTAB · Mar 25, 2014 · IPR2013-00496 · APJ Sally C Medley · IPR · Order

    The Board granted the parties’ joint motion to terminate IPR2013-00496 and terminated the proceeding without a final written decision.

    RulingsOther
    • PTAB / AIA Trials › Other PTAB motions (exclude, strike, seal, additional discovery, rehearing)Granted

      “Based on the facts of this case, it is appropriate to enter judgment1 without rendering a final written decision. See 35 U.S.C. § 317(a); 37 C.F.R. § 42.72. It is ORDERED that the joint motion to terminate IPR2013-00496 is granted; FURTHER ORDERED that the proceeding is terminated; and FURTHER ORDERED that the parties’ joint request that the settlement agreement be treated as business confidential information kept separate from the patent file, and made available only to Federal Government agencies on written request, or to any person on a showing of good cause, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c), is granted.” slip op. at 2

    None
    Patents in suitUS 8,305,840
  • PTAB · Mar 17, 2014 · IPR2014-00244 · APJ Trenton A Ward · IPR · Order

    The Board granted the parties’ joint motion and terminated the proceeding before institution, without a final written decision.

    RulingsOther
    • PTAB / AIA Trials › Other PTAB motions (exclude, strike, seal, additional discovery, rehearing)Granted

      “The parties are reminded that the Board is not a party to the settlement, and may independently identify any question of patentability. 37 C.F.R § 42.74(a). Generally, however, the Board expects that a proceeding will terminate after the filing of a settlement agreement. See, e.g., Office Patent Trial Practice Guide, 77 Fed. Reg. 48756, 48768 (Aug. 14, 2012). These proceedings are still in the preliminary stages, as the Board has not instituted a trial. The Board is persuaded that, under these circumstances, it is appropriate to terminate this proceeding without rendering a final written decision. 37 C.F.R. § 42.72. Accordingly, it is: ORDERED that the joint motion to terminate this proceeding is GRANTED” slip op. at 2

    None
    Patents in suitUS 5,793,302
Page 1 of 2
← Previous12Next →

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.