PTAB
Advanced fields
12,531 decisions · 246msnewest first
  • ARM Ltd v. Daedalus Prime LLCAll claims unpatentable
    PTAB · Sep 9, 2026 · IPR2025-00207 · APJ Gregg I Anderson · IPR · Final written decision

    Claims 1–7, 11–14, and 16–19 are unpatentable as obvious over the asserted grounds.

    RulingsFinal written decision
    • Skill levelSkill level petitioner adoptedDecided for petitioner

      “would have (1) at least a bachelor’s degree in electrical engineering, computer engineering, physics, or a similar field, and (2) approximately two years of industry or academic experience in a field related to microelectronic architecture design, including experience with cache management in multicore systems-on-a-chip (SoCs). (Ex-1003 ¶¶50-51.) More related education would compensate for fewer years of work experience (and vice versa). (Ex-1003 ¶¶50-51.) Pet. 4–5. This definition was adopted in the Institution Decision. Inst. Dec. 13. Patent Owner does not dispute the finding. PO Resp. 5–6. For the purpose of our Decision, we maintain the finding made in the Institution Decision.” slip op. at 15

    • Claim Construction › Intrinsic evidence (Phillips canons) › Plain and ordinary meaning to a POSITATerm construed board ownDecided for petitioner

      “1. “a single caching agent” (claim 1) We note a construction issue from the ’1344 IPR where we construed a “single caching agent,” which is recited in claim 1 here. ’1344 IPR Final Decision, 16–18. We concluded that a “‘single caching agent’ means ‘one caching agent for the processor, which may be formed from distributed portions.’” Id. at 18. We adopted that construction in our Institution Decision in this case. Inst. Dec. 15.” slip op. at 16

    • Claim Construction › Threshold & procedure › Whether a term needs construction (O2 Micro)No construction neededNot reached

      “2. Remaining claim terms Independent claims 11 and 16 include different language as to “caching agent.” Claim 11 recites “a caching agent.” Ex. 1001, 8:18. Claim 16 similarly recites “a first caching agent.” Id. at 8:47–48. Neither claims 11 or 16 includes claim 1’s recitation of “distributed portions. The “caching agent” limitations of claims 11 and 16, are not at issue. Accordingly, no construction is necessary.” slip op. at 18

    • PTAB / AIA Trials › §315(e) estoppelEstoppel appliesDecided for petitioner

      “(1) the issue is identical to one decided in the first action; (2) the issue was actually litigated in the first action; (3) resolution of the issue was essential to a final judgment in the first action; and (4) plaintiff had a full and fair opportunity to litigate the issue in the first action. Pet. Br. 2. Further, Petitioner alleges the ’1344 Final Decision was not appealed by Patent Owner and is therefore a basis for issue preclusion. Id. (citing Power Integrations, Inc. v. Semiconductor Components Indus., LLC, 926 F.3d 1306, 1311–12 (Fed. Cir. 2019)).” slip op. at 19

    Patent outcomesUS 8,984,228 unpatentable
    Claim construction§ 103 obviousnesscites KSR · Graham
    Patents in suitUS 8,984,228
  • Pgr2026-00044Instituted
    PTAB · Sep 9, 2026 · PGR2026-00044 · APJ John A Squires · PGR · Institution

    The Board granted PGR2026-00044 after finding the petition showed the required likelihood of prevailing on at least one challenged claim.

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

      “Pursuant 35 U.S.C. §§ 314(a) and 324(a), after review of the merits, the petitioner has shown a reasonable likelihood of prevailing with respect to at least one of the claims challenged in the petition, or that it is more likely than not that at least one of the claims challenged in the petition is unpatentable, as appropriate, and no other non-discretionary considerations warrant denial of institution. Accordingly, institution of inter partes review and post-grant review is granted in the following proceedings: IPR2026-00256 IPR2026-00312 IPR2026-00327 IPR2026-00257 IPR2026-00313 IPR2026-00334 IPR2026-00258 IPR2026-00314 PGR2026-00044 IPR2026-00259” slip op. at 2

    None
    Patents in suitUS 12,359,506
  • Ipr2026-00334Instituted
    PTAB · Sep 9, 2026 · IPR2026-00334 · APJ John A Squires · IPR · Institution

    The Director granted institution of IPR2026-00334 after finding a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on at least one challenged claim and no other non-discretionary reason to deny institution.

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

      “the petitioner has shown a reasonable likelihood of prevailing with respect to at least one of the claims challenged in the petition, or that it is more likely than not that at least one of the claims challenged in the petition is unpatentable, as appropriate, and no other non-discretionary considerations warrant denial of institution. Accordingly, institution of inter partes review and post-grant review is granted in the following proceedings: IPR2026-00256 IPR2026-00312 IPR2026-00327 IPR2026-00257 IPR2026-00313 IPR2026-00334 IPR2026-00258 IPR2026-00314 PGR2026-00044 IPR2026-00259” slip op. at 2

    None
    Patents in suitUS 12,231,703
  • PTAB · Sep 9, 2026 · IPR2026-00327 · APJ John A Squires · IPR · Order

    The notice lists IPR2026-00327 among proceedings granted institution after the petitioner showed the required likelihood of success.

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

      “Pursuant 35 U.S.C. §§ 314(a) and 324(a), after review of the merits, the petitioner has shown a reasonable likelihood of prevailing with respect to at least one of the claims challenged in the petition, or that it is more likely than not that at least one of the claims challenged in the petition is unpatentable, as appropriate, and no other non-discretionary considerations warrant denial of institution. Accordingly, institution of inter partes review and post-grant review is granted in the following proceedings: IPR2026-00256 IPR2026-00312 IPR2026-00327 IPR2026-00257 IPR2026-00313 IPR2026-00334 IPR2026-00258 IPR2026-00314 PGR2026-00044 IPR2026-00259” slip op. at 2

    None
    Patents in suitUS 12,254,103
  • Ipr2026-00314Instituted
    PTAB · Sep 9, 2026 · IPR2026-00314 · APJ John A Squires · IPR · Institution

    The Director granted institution of IPR2026-00314 after finding the petition showed a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on at least one challenged claim.

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

      “the petitioner has shown a reasonable likelihood of prevailing with respect to at least one of the claims challenged in the petition, or that it is more likely than not that at least one of the claims challenged in the petition is unpatentable, as appropriate, and no other non-discretionary considerations warrant denial of institution. Accordingly, institution of inter partes review and post-grant review is granted in the following proceedings: IPR2026-00256 IPR2026-00312 IPR2026-00327 IPR2026-00257 IPR2026-00313 IPR2026-00334 IPR2026-00258 IPR2026-00314 PGR2026-00044 IPR2026-00259” slip op. at 2

    None
    Patents in suitUS 11,066,656
  • Ipr2026-00313Instituted
    PTAB · Sep 9, 2026 · IPR2026-00313 · APJ John A Squires · IPR · Institution

    The Director granted institution of IPR2026-00313 after finding a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on at least one challenged claim.

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

      “Pursuant 35 U.S.C. §§ 314(a) and 324(a), after review of the merits, the petitioner has shown a reasonable likelihood of prevailing with respect to at least one of the claims challenged in the petition, or that it is more likely than not that at least one of the claims challenged in the petition is unpatentable, as appropriate, and no other non-discretionary considerations warrant denial of institution. Accordingly, institution of inter partes review and post-grant review is granted in the following proceedings:” slip op. at 2

    None
    Patents in suitUS 11,041,149
  • PTAB · Sep 9, 2026 · IPR2026-00312 · APJ John A Squires · IPR · Order

    The Director granted institution of IPR2026-00312 after finding the petitioner showed a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on at least one challenged claim.

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

      “Pursuant 35 U.S.C. §§ 314(a) and 324(a), after review of the merits, the petitioner has shown a reasonable likelihood of prevailing with respect to at least one of the claims challenged in the petition, or that it is more likely than not that at least one of the claims challenged in the petition is unpatentable, as appropriate, and no other non-discretionary considerations warrant denial of institution. Accordingly, institution of inter partes review and post-grant review is granted in the following proceedings:” slip op. at 2

    None
    Patents in suitUS 10,865,400
  • Ipr2026-00259Instituted
    PTAB · Sep 9, 2026 · IPR2026-00259 · APJ John A Squires · IPR · Institution

    The Director granted institution of IPR2026-00259 after finding the petitioner showed a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on at least one challenged claim and no non-discretionary consideration warranted denial.

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

      “Pursuant 35 U.S.C. §§ 314(a) and 324(a), after review of the merits, the petitioner has shown a reasonable likelihood of prevailing with respect to at least one of the claims challenged in the petition, or that it is more likely than not that at least one of the claims challenged in the petition is unpatentable, as appropriate, and no other non-discretionary considerations warrant denial of institution. Accordingly, institution of inter partes review and post-grant review is granted in the following proceedings: IPR2026-00256 IPR2026-00312 IPR2026-00327 IPR2026-00257 IPR2026-00313 IPR2026-00334 IPR2026-00258 IPR2026-00314 PGR2026-00044 IPR2026-00259” slip op. at 2

    None
    Patents in suitUS 12,291,566
  • PTAB · Sep 9, 2026 · IPR2026-00258 · APJ John A Squires · IPR · Order

    Institution was granted in IPR2026-00258 because the petitioner showed a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on at least one challenged claim, and no non-discretionary consideration warranted denial.

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

      “Pursuant 35 U.S.C. §§ 314(a) and 324(a), after review of the merits, the petitioner has shown a reasonable likelihood of prevailing with respect to at least one of the claims challenged in the petition, or that it is more likely than not that at least one of the claims challenged in the petition is unpatentable, as appropriate, and no other non-discretionary considerations warrant denial of institution. Accordingly, institution of inter partes review and post-grant review is granted in the following proceedings: IPR2026-00256 IPR2026-00312 IPR2026-00327 IPR2026-00257 IPR2026-00313 IPR2026-00334 IPR2026-00258 IPR2026-00314 PGR2026-00044 IPR2026-00259” slip op. at 2

    None
    Patents in suitUS 12,122,824
  • PTAB · Sep 9, 2026 · IPR2026-00257 · APJ John A Squires · IPR · Order

    The Director granted institution of IPR2026-00257 after finding the petition showed a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on at least one challenged claim.

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

      “Pursuant 35 U.S.C. §§ 314(a) and 324(a), after review of the merits, the petitioner has shown a reasonable likelihood of prevailing with respect to at least one of the claims challenged in the petition, or that it is more likely than not that at least one of the claims challenged in the petition is unpatentable, as appropriate, and no other non-discretionary considerations warrant denial of institution. Accordingly, institution of inter partes review and post-grant review is granted in the following proceedings: IPR2026-00256 IPR2026-00312 IPR2026-00327 IPR2026-00257 IPR2026-00313 IPR2026-00334 IPR2026-00258 IPR2026-00314 PGR2026-00044 IPR2026-00259” slip op. at 2

    None
    Patents in suitUS 11,041,020
Page 7 of 1,254

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.