• Ipr2026-00322Institution denied
  PTAB · Jul 28, 2026 · IPR2026-00322 · APJ John A Squires · IPR · Director review

  The Director denied institution of IPR2026-00322 after reviewing discretionary and non-merits considerations.

  RulingsDirector review decision

  • Director reviewDirector review, deniedDenied

    “NOTICE Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 314(a), after review of discretionary and non- merits considerations, institution of inter partes review is denied in the following proceedings: IPR2026-00320 IPR2026-00321 IPR2026-00322 Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §§ 314(a) and 324(a), after review of” slip op. at 1

  Discretionary denial
  Patents in suitUS 10,020,961
• Ipr2026-00321Institution denied
  PTAB · Jul 28, 2026 · IPR2026-00321 · APJ John A Squires · IPR · Director review

  The Director denied institution in IPR2026-00321 after reviewing discretionary and non-merits considerations.

  RulingsDirector review decision

  • Director reviewDirector review, deniedDenied

    “NOTICE Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 314(a), after review of discretionary and non- merits considerations, institution of inter partes review is denied in the following proceedings: IPR2026-00320 IPR2026-00321 IPR2026-00322 Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §§ 314(a) and 324(a), after review of” slip op. at 1

  • Other 314aInstitution denied discretionary otherInstitution denied

    “NOTICE Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 314(a), after review of discretionary and non- merits considerations, institution of inter partes review is denied in the following proceedings: IPR2026-00320 IPR2026-00321 IPR2026-00322 Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §§ 314(a) and 324(a), after review of” slip op. at 1

  Discretionary denial
  Patents in suitUS 9,313,101
• Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Sitnet LLCAdverse judgment
  PTAB · Jul 15, 2026 · IPR2026-00100 · APJ Thu A Dang · IPR · Adverse judgment

  The Board granted adverse judgment against SitNet after its disclaimer left no challenged claims remaining in the instituted trial.

  RulingsAdverse judgment

  • Adverse judgmentAdverse judgmentGranted

    “judgment include: . . . [c]ancellation or disclaimer of a claim such that the party has no remaining claim in the trial.” 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b)(2). “The application of the [adverse judgment] rule on its face does not turn on the patentee’s characterization of its own request.” Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., 880 F.3d 1345, 1349 (Fed. Cir. 2018). In this case, Patent Owner’s disclaimer of all claims of the ’290 patent leaves no claims remaining in the trial. Although Patent Owner argues that “it was filed to conserve the limited resources of the Board and the Parties in light of the fact that the ’290 Patent is no longer involved in any copending litigation” (Ex. 3001), we deem such argument not a persuasive reason as to why we should not apply § 42.73(b)(2), or why termination is more appropriate. Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b)(2), we construe Patent Owner’s disclaimer of all claims at trial as a request for adverse judgment, which we grant.” slip op. at 3

  None
  Patents in suitUS 10,117,290
• Ipr2026-00310Institution denied
  PTAB · Jul 14, 2026 · IPR2026-00310 · APJ John A Squires · IPR · Director review

  The Director denied institution of IPR2026-00310 after review of discretionary and non-merits considerations.

  RulingsDirector review decision

  • Director reviewDirector review, deniedDenied

    “NOTICE Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 314(a), after review of discretionary and non- merits considerations, institution of inter partes review is denied in the following proceedings:” slip op. at 1

  Discretionary denial
  Patents in suitUS 12,063,402
• Ipr2026-00308Institution denied
  PTAB · Jul 14, 2026 · IPR2026-00308 · APJ John A Squires · IPR · Director review

  Institution of IPR2026-00308 was denied after review of discretionary and non-merits considerations.

  RulingsDirector review decision

  • Director reviewDirector review, deniedDenied

    “NOTICE Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 314(a), after review of discretionary and non- merits considerations, institution of inter partes review is denied in the following proceedings:” slip op. at 1

  Discretionary denial
  Patents in suitUS 11,017,668
• Ipr2026-00307Institution denied
  PTAB · Jul 14, 2026 · IPR2026-00307 · APJ John A Squires · IPR · Director review

  The Director denied institution of IPR2026-00307 after review of discretionary and non-merits considerations.

  RulingsDirector review decision

  • Other 314aInstitution denied discretionary otherInstitution denied

    “NOTICE Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 314(a), after review of discretionary and non- merits considerations, institution of inter partes review is denied in the following proceedings:” slip op. at 1

  • Director reviewDirector review, deniedDenied

    “Before JOHN A. SQUIRES, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office. NOTICE Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 314(a), after review of discretionary and non- merits considerations, institution of inter partes review is denied in the following proceedings:” slip op. at 1

  Discretionary denial
  Patents in suitUS 11,164,456
• Ipr2026-00306Institution denied
  PTAB · Jul 14, 2026 · IPR2026-00306 · APJ John A Squires · IPR · Director review

  The Director denied institution of IPR2026-00306 after reviewing discretionary and non-merits considerations.

  RulingsDirector review decision

  • Director reviewDirector review, deniedDenied

    “NOTICE Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 314(a), after review of discretionary and non- merits considerations, institution of inter partes review is denied in the following proceedings:” slip op. at 1

  Discretionary denial
  Patents in suitUS 10,916,138
• Ipr2026-00305Institution denied
  PTAB · Jul 14, 2026 · IPR2026-00305 · APJ John A Squires · IPR · Director review

  Institution of IPR2026-00305 was denied because the petitioner failed to show a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on at least one challenged claim.

  RulingsDirector review decision

  • Director reviewDirector review, deniedDenied

    “NOTICE Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 314(a), after review of discretionary and non- merits considerations, institution of inter partes review is denied in the following proceedings: IPR2026-00255 IPR2026-00284 IPR2026-00307 IPR2026-00261 IPR2026-00300* IPR2026-00308 IPR2026-00281 IPR2026-00305 IPR2026-00309” slip op. at 1

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

    “NOTICE Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 314(a), after review of discretionary and non- merits considerations, institution of inter partes review is denied in the following proceedings: IPR2026-00255 IPR2026-00284 IPR2026-00307 IPR2026-00261 IPR2026-00300* IPR2026-00308 IPR2026-00281 IPR2026-00305 IPR2026-00309” slip op. at 1

  None
  Patents in suitUS 7,840,427
• Ipr2026-00282Institution denied
  PTAB · Jul 14, 2026 · IPR2026-00282 · APJ John A Squires · IPR · Director review

  The Director denied institution of IPR2026-00282 after review of discretionary and non-merits considerations.

  RulingsDirector review decision

  • Director reviewDirector review, deniedDenied

    “NOTICE Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 314(a), after review of discretionary and non- merits considerations, institution of inter partes review is denied in the following proceedings:” slip op. at 1

  Discretionary denial
  Patents in suitUS 9,519,729
• Ipr2026-00283Institution denied
  PTAB · Jul 14, 2026 · IPR2026-00283 · APJ John A Squires · IPR · Director review

  The Director denied institution of IPR2026-00283 after review of discretionary and non-merits considerations.

  RulingsDirector review decision

  • Director reviewDirector review, deniedDenied

    “NOTICE Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 314(a), after review of discretionary and non- merits considerations, institution of inter partes review is denied in the following proceedings:” slip op. at 1

  • Other 314aInstitution denied discretionary otherInstitution denied

    “NOTICE Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 314(a), after review of discretionary and non- merits considerations, institution of inter partes review is denied in the following proceedings:” slip op. at 1

  Discretionary denial
  Patents in suitUS 8,533,628

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.