PTAB
Advanced fields
12 decisions · 498msnewest first
  • PTAB · Feb 21, 2024 · IPR2023-01312 · APJ Jamie T Wisz · IPR · Adverse judgment

    The Board entered adverse judgment against Patent Owner on claims 1–18 after Patent Owner disclaimed all claims, and terminated the proceeding.

    RulingsAdverse judgment
    • Adverse judgmentAdverse judgmentGranted

      “requisite fees. See Ex. 2104; see also 37 C.F.R. § 1.321 (setting forth requirements for statutory disclaimer). Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b), “[a]ctions construed to be a request for adverse judgment include . . . (2) [c]ancellation or disclaimer of a claim such that the party has no remaining claim in the trial.” Because Patent Owner has disclaimed all claims of the ’992 patent, we construe this disclaimer as a request for adverse judgment, and we enter adverse judgment against the Patent Owner with respect to claims 1–18 of the ’992 patent. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that judgment is entered under 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b) against Patent Owner with respect to claims 1–18 of U.S. Patent No. 10,464,992 B2; and” slip op. at 2

    None
    Patents in suitUS 10,464,992
  • PTAB · Feb 21, 2024 · IPR2023-00462 · APJ Jamie T Wisz · IPR · Adverse judgment

    After Patent Owner disclaimed claims 1–18, the Board entered adverse judgment against Patent Owner on those claims and terminated the proceeding.

    RulingsAdverse judgment
    • Adverse judgmentAdverse judgmentGranted

      “Patent Owner has disclaimed all claims of the ’992 patent and paid the requisite fees. See Ex. 2104; see also 37 C.F.R. § 1.321 (setting forth requirements for statutory disclaimer). Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b), “[a]ctions construed to be a request for adverse judgment include . . . (2) [c]ancellation or disclaimer of a claim such that the party has no remaining claim in the trial.” Because Patent Owner has disclaimed all claims of the ’992 patent, we construe this disclaimer as a request for adverse judgment, and we enter adverse judgment against the Patent Owner with respect to claims 1–18 of the ’992 patent. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that judgment is entered under 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b) against Patent Owner with respect to claims 1–18 of U.S. Patent No. 10,464,992 B2; and” slip op. at 2

    None
    Patents in suitUS 10,464,992
Page 2 of 2

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.