PTAB
Advanced fields
4 decisions · 333msnewest first
  • PTAB · Mar 25, 2026 · IPR2025-00618 · APJ Nabeel U Khan · IPR · Adverse judgment

    After Patent Owner disclaimed all challenged claims, the Board entered adverse judgment against Patent Owner under 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b)(2).

    RulingsAdverse judgment
    • Adverse judgmentAdverse judgmentOther

      “Our rules state that “disclaimer of a claim such that a party has no remaining claim in the trial” is “construed to be a request for adverse judgment.” 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b). Because Patent Owner has disclaimed all challenged claims and no claims remain in this proceeding, adverse judgment is appropriate. We, therefore, enter judgment adverse to the Patent Owner.” slip op. at 2

    None
    Patents in suitUS 11,695,823
  • PTAB · Oct 10, 2024 · IPR2024-00456 · APJ Garth D Baer · IPR · Adverse judgment

    The Board granted Patent Owner’s request for adverse judgment after it disclaimed claims 1–9, 15–22, and 24–27.

    RulingsAdverse judgment
    • Adverse judgmentAdverse judgmentGranted

      “Rule 42.73(b) permits a party to “request judgment against itself at any time during a proceeding,” and states that “disclaimer of a claim such that the party has no remaining claim in the trial” will be construed as a request for adverse judgment. Under these circumstances, we grant Patent Owner’s motion for adverse judgment. ORDER It is: ORDERED that Patent Owner’s Motion for adverse judgment (Paper 28) is GRANTED, and FURTHER ORDERED that judgment is entered against Patent Owner with respect to claims 1–9, 15–22, and 24–27 of the ’888 patent.” slip op. at 2

    None
    Patents in suitUS 8,612,888
  • PTAB · Oct 1, 2024 · IPR2024-00404 · APJ Garth D Baer · IPR · Adverse judgment

    The Board granted Patent Owner’s request for adverse judgment after it disclaimed all challenged claims: 1, 3, 4, 7-10, 13, 14, 16-18, and 22.

    RulingsAdverse judgment
    • Adverse judgmentAdverse judgmentGranted

      “Rule 42.73(b) permits a party to “request judgment against itself at any time during a proceeding,” and states that “disclaimer of a claim such that the party has no remaining claim in the trial” will be construed as a request for adverse judgment. Under these circumstances, we grant Patent Owner’s motion for adverse judgment.” slip op. at 2

    None
    Patents in suitUS 8,624,844
  • PTAB · Jan 27, 2022 · IPR2020-01415 · APJ Steven M Amundson · IPR · Adverse judgment

    The Board entered adverse judgment against Patent Owner on claims 1–19 after finding he abandoned the contest by failing to file mandatory notices or other papers.

    RulingsAdverse judgment
    • Adverse judgmentAdverse judgmentGranted

      “adverse judgment should not be entered against Patent Owner in view of his failure to file mandatory notices. Paper 8. The Order explained that the Board’s rules provide that “[a] party may request adverse judgment against itself at any time during a proceeding” and that “[a]ctions construed to be a request for adverse judgment include . . . [a]bandonment of the contest.” Id. at 3 (quoting 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b)). The Order also explained that “[f]ailure to participate in a proceeding, such as failure to file mandatory notices according to 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b), may be considered abandonment of the contest and result in adverse judgment against a patent owner under 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b).” Id. (citing Cellpak, Inc. v. Mambate USA Inc., IPR2021-00007, Paper 4 at 2 (PTAB Mar. 23, 2021)). The Order gave” slip op. at 3

    None
    Patents in suitUS 8,112,405

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.