- Texas Instruments Incorporated / Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. v. Unifi Scientific Batteries, LLCAdverse judgmentPTAB · Jun 13, 2014 · IPR2013-00213 · APJ Justin T Arbes · IPR · Adverse judgment
The Board granted Patent Owner’s request for adverse judgment and entered judgment against it on claims 1 and 4-18.
RulingsAdverse judgment- Adverse judgmentAdverse judgmentGranted
“Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b), a party may request judgment against itself at any time during a proceeding. Cancellation or disclaimer 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). Patent Owner has disclaimed all of the claims of the ’298 patent on which a trial was instituted in the instant proceedings, such that after the disclaimer, it will have no remaining claim in either trial. In consideration of the foregoing, it is hereby: ORDERED that Patent Owner’s request for adverse judgment under 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b) in each proceeding is granted; and FURTHER ORDERED that judgment is entered against Patent Owner with respect to claims 1 and 4-18 of the ’298 patent.” slip op. at 2
NonePatents in suitUS 6,791,298 - Arthrex, Inc. v. Bonutti Skeletal Innovations, LLCAdverse judgmentPTAB · May 6, 2014 · IPR2013-00632 · APJ Mitchell G Weatherly · IPR · Adverse judgment
The Board entered adverse judgment against Bonutti for claims 1–31 after the patent owner disclaimed all challenged claims.
RulingsAdverse judgment- Adverse judgmentAdverse judgmentGranted
“II. DISCUSSION Under 35 U.S.C. § 42.73(b), “a party may request judgment against itself at any time during a proceeding.” We interpret Bonutti’s cancellation of claims such that it has no remaining claim in the trial to be a request for adverse judgment. 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b)(2). Accordingly, we determine that Bonutti’s disclaimer of claims 1-31 of the ’514 patent meets the conditions for termination of this review and entry of judgment against Bonutti.” slip op. at 2
NonePatents in suitUS 8,147,514 - Arthrex, Inc. v. Bonutti Skeletal Innovations, LLCAdverse judgmentPTAB · Apr 30, 2014 · IPR2013-00631 · APJ Mitchell G Weatherly · IPR · Adverse judgment
The Board entered adverse judgment against Bonutti after it disclaimed all challenged claims: 64, 65, 67, 69, 70, 72–76, 80, 82, and 83.
RulingsAdverse judgment- Adverse judgmentAdverse judgmentGranted
“II. DISCUSSION Under 35 U.S.C. § 42.73(b), “[a] party may request judgment against itself at any time during a proceeding.” We interpret Bonutti’s cancellation of claims such that it has no remaining claim in the trial to be a request for adverse judgment. 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b)(2). Accordingly, we determine that Bonutti’s disclaimer of claims 64, 65, 67, 69, 70, 72–76, 80, 82, and 83 of the ’986 patent meets the conditions for termination of this review and entry of judgment against Bonutti.” slip op. at 2
NonePatents in suitUS 5,921,986 - Corning Gilbert Inc. v. PPC Broadband, Inc.Adverse judgmentPTAB · Apr 15, 2014 · IPR2013-00343 · APJ Jacqueline Wright Bonilla · IPR · Adverse judgment
The Board granted PPC’s request for adverse judgment against itself and entered judgment against PPC on claims 1–6.
RulingsAdverse judgment- Adverse judgmentAdverse judgmentGranted
“Owner’s Request for Adverse Judgment Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b)” (“Request”). Paper 26; see also Paper 25. The Request states that “[i]n the interest of streamlining the proceedings and focusing its resources, the Patent Owner decided to cancel all of the claims (1-6) of the 8,313,353 Patent involved in this proceeding.” Paper 26 at 1. In the Request, PPC requests cancellation of all claims at issue in this proceeding, i.e., claims 1-6 of U.S. Patent No. 8,313,353 B2 (“the ’353 patent) (Ex. 1001). Id. We note that 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b)(2) indicates that the Board will construe cancellation of all claims at issue in a trial as a request for adverse judgment. Along these lines, PPC also requests that the Board enter a final adverse judgment against PPC. Id.1 We grant PPC’s request to cancel claims 1-6 of the ’353 patent. We also grant PPC’s request for entry of adverse judgment against itself in this proceeding.” slip op. at 2
NonePatents in suitUS 8,313,353 - Smith & Nephew, Inc. v. Bonutti Skeletal Innovations LLCAdverse judgmentPTAB · Mar 24, 2014 · IPR2013-00605 · APJ Richard E Rice · IPR · Adverse judgment
The Board granted Patent Owner’s request for adverse judgment after it disclaimed sole challenged claim 23.
RulingsAdverse judgment- Adverse judgmentAdverse judgmentGranted
“Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b), a party may request judgment against itself at any time during a proceeding. Actions construed to be a request for adverse judgment include disclaimer of a claim such that the party has no remaining claim in the trial. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b)(2). As claim 23 of the ’229 patent is the only claim challenged (Paper 3 at 2, 4), and claim 23 has been disclaimed, Patent Owner has no remaining claim in this inter partes review. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that Patent Owner’s request for judgment against itself under 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b)(2), with respect to claim 23 of U.S. Patent No. 7,749,229 B1, is GRANTED; and” slip op. at 2
NonePatents in suitUS 7,749,229 - ZTE Corporation / ZTE (USA) Inc. v. Contentguard Holdings Inc.Adverse judgmentPTAB · Aug 6, 2013 · IPR2013-00134 · APJ Jameson Lee · IPR · Adverse judgment
The Board granted ContentGuard’s request for adverse judgment and cancellation of claims 12-22 and 30-38 of Patent 7,225,160.
RulingsAdverse judgment- Adverse judgmentAdverse judgmentGranted
“Discussion Under 35 U.S.C. § 42.73(b), a party may request judgment against itself at any time during a proceeding. Also, under 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b)(2), actions construed as a request for entry of adverse judgment include cancellation of a claim such that the party has no remaining claim in the trial. ContentGuard has not only requested cancellation of all claims involved in this inter partes review, such that after the cancellation it will have no remaining claim in the trial, but also expressly requested entry of adverse judgment.” slip op. at 2
NonePatents in suitUS 7,225,160
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.