PTAB
Advanced fields
3 decisions · 282msnewest first
  • PTAB · Mar 25, 2025 · IPR2024-00892 · APJ Cynthia L Murphy · IPR · Adverse judgment

    The Board entered adverse judgment against Patent Owner on claims 1–20 after finding abandonment, resulting in cancellation of all challenged claims.

    RulingsAdverse judgment
    • Adverse judgmentAdverse judgmentGranted

      “As noted in the Scheduling Order, “[i]f Patent Owner elects not to file a response to the Petition, Patent Owner must arrange a conference call with the parties and the Board.” [Paper 15, 9.] Thus, Patent Owner has three options: 1) file a response by February 18, 2025, 2) arrange a conference call in accordance with the Scheduling Order, or 3) stipulate a revised due date with Petitioner and file a response by the stipulated due date. Patent Owner must appoint counsel to proceed with any of these options, which Patent Owner should do without delay. Patent Owner’s failure to proceed with one of these options could be viewed as an abandonment of this proceeding. And such abandonment would be construed as Patent Owner’s request for adverse judgment against itself (see 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b)(4)), resulting in cancellation of all of the claims challenged in the Petition.” slip op. at 2

    • PTAB / AIA Trials › Other PTAB motions (exclude, strike, seal, additional discovery, rehearing)Not reached

      “Accordingly, it is ORDERED that adverse judgment shall be entered against Patent Owner as to claims 1–20 of the ’466 patent under 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b).4 FURTHER ORDERED that this paper constitutes a final written decision pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 318(a) holding that claims 1–20 of the ’466 patent are unpatentable based on the adverse judgment; and “not made any attempt whatsoever to contact Petitioner regarding this IPR.” Ex. 1027 ¶ 7. 3 Patent Owner is reminded of the applicable estoppel provisions in 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(d)(3). 4 Petitioner filed a motion asking for a finding that Patent Owner had abandoned the proceedings and constructively requested adverse judgment against itself. See Paper 19; Ex. 3002. Petitioner’s motion is dismissed as moot in view of our entry of adverse judgment for the reasons expressed herein. The same applies to Petitioner’s request to submit supplemental evidence. See Ex. 3003.” slip op. at 3

    None
    Patents in suitUS 9,862,466
  • PTAB · Mar 19, 2024 · IPR2024-00564 · APJ Thu A Dang · IPR · Adverse judgment

    The Board granted Patent Owner’s request for adverse judgment after it disclaimed claims 1–25 before institution, leaving no claim for consideration.

    RulingsAdverse judgment
    • Adverse judgmentAdverse judgmentGranted

      “Our Rules provide that “[a]ctions construed to be a request for adverse judgment include: . . . [c]ancellation or disclaimer of a claim such that the Owner’s disclaimer of claims 1–25 leaves no claim remaining in the trial. Therefore, pursuant to our Rules, we construe this disclaimer as a request for adverse judgment, which we grant.” slip op. at 2

    • PTAB / AIA Trials › Joinder §315(c) / SAS all-or-nothingNot reached

      “Petition requesting an inter partes review of claims 1–25 (“the challenged claims”) of U.S. Patent No. 8,506,649 B2 (Ex. 1001, “the ’649 patent). Paper 2 (“Petition”). Along with the Petition, Petitioner filed a Motion for Joinder to inter partes review IPR2023-01185. Paper 3 (“Motion”).” slip op. at 2

    None
    Patents in suitUS 8,506,649
  • PTAB · Aug 7, 2014 · IPR2014-00149 · APJ Frances L Ippolito · IPR · Adverse judgment

    The Board granted Patent Owner’s request to cancel claims 1–14 and entered adverse judgment against Patent Owner on those claims.

    RulingsAdverse judgment
    • Adverse judgmentAdverse judgmentDecided for patent owner

      “Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b), a party may request judgment against itself at any time during a proceeding. Cancellation of one or more claims, such that the patent owner has no remaining claim in the trial, is construed to be a request for adverse judgment. 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b)(2). Here, Patent Owner requests cancellation of all claims of the ’580 patent on which a trial was instituted, such that Patent Owner would have no remaining claim in the trial. Thus, it is appropriate to enter judgment at this time.” slip op. at 4

    • PTAB / AIA Trials › Motions to amend / substitute claimsMotion to amend, grantedGranted

      “claims at issue in the instant proceeding, namely claims 1–14. Mot. to Amend. In email correspondence to Board administrative staff dated July 17, 2014 and July 18, 2014, counsel for Petitioner indicated that Petitioner does not oppose Patent Owner’s Motion to Amend.6 Patent Owner’s Motion to Amend, cancelling claims 1–14, is granted. Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b), a party may request judgment against itself at any time during a proceeding. Cancellation of one or more claims, such that the patent owner has no remaining claim in the trial, is construed to be a request for adverse judgment. 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b)(2). Here, Patent Owner requests cancellation of all claims of the ’580 patent on which a trial was instituted, such that Patent Owner would have no remaining claim in the trial. Thus, it is appropriate to enter judgment at this time.” slip op. at 4

    • Additional discoveryNot reached

      “MOTION FOR AUTHORIZATION TO COMPEL TESTIMONY Petitioner’s Motion for Authorization to Compel Testimony is dismissed as moot because judgment is being entered against Patent Owner on the challenged claims.” slip op. at 4

    None
    Patents in suitUS 8,321,580

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.