- Pgr2025-00088Institution deniedPTAB · Mar 17, 2026 · PGR2025-00088 · APJ John A Squires · PGR · Director review
The Director discretionarily denied institution in PGR2025-00088 in view of Revvo Technologies.
RulingsDirector review decision- PTAB / AIA Trials › Discretionary denialInstitution denied discretionary otherInstitution denied
“1 Although previously referred, this case is now discretionarily denied in view of Revvo Technologies, Inc. v. Cerebrum Sensor Technologies, Inc., IPR2025-00632, Paper 20 (Director Nov. 3, 2025) (precedential).” slip op. at 1
Discretionary denialPatents in suitUS 12,174,107 - Pgr2026-00009Institution deniedPTAB · Mar 10, 2026 · PGR2026-00009 · APJ John A Squires · PGR · Director review
The Director discretionarily denied institution of PGR2026-00009 after reviewing discretionary and non-merits considerations.
RulingsDirector review decision- Director reviewDirector review, deniedDenied
“NOTICE Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 314(a) and § 324(a), after review of discretionary and non-merits considerations, institution of inter partes review or post-grant review is denied in the following proceedings:” slip op. at 1
Discretionary denialPatents in suitUS 12,324,873 - Pgr2026-00006Institution deniedPTAB · Mar 10, 2026 · PGR2026-00006 · APJ John A Squires · PGR · Director review
The Director discretionarily denied institution of PGR2026-00006 after reviewing discretionary and non-merits considerations.
RulingsDirector review decision- Director reviewDirector review, deniedDenied
“NOTICE Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 314(a) and § 324(a), after review of discretionary and non-merits considerations, institution of inter partes review or post-grant review is denied in the following proceedings:” slip op. at 1
- PTAB / AIA Trials › Discretionary denialInstitution denied discretionary otherInstitution denied
“NOTICE Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 314(a) and § 324(a), after review of discretionary and non-merits considerations, institution of inter partes review or post-grant review is denied in the following proceedings:” slip op. at 1
Discretionary denialPatents in suitUS 12,377,204 - Pgr2025-00078Institution deniedPTAB · Mar 10, 2026 · PGR2025-00078 · APJ John A Squires · PGR · Director review
The Director discretionarily denied institution of PGR2025-00078 in view of Revvo Technologies, Inc. v. Cerebrum Sensor Technologies, Inc.
RulingsDirector review decision- Director reviewDirector review, deniedDenied
“NOTICE Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 314(a) and § 324(a), after review of discretionary and non-merits considerations, institution of inter partes review or post-grant review is denied in the following proceedings:” slip op. at 1
Discretionary denialPatents in suitUS 12,171,916 - Pgr2025-00077Institution deniedPTAB · Mar 10, 2026 · PGR2025-00077 · APJ John A Squires · PGR · Director review
The Director discretionarily denied institution of PGR2025-00077 after reviewing discretionary and non-merits considerations.
RulingsDirector review decision- Director reviewDirector review, deniedDenied
“NOTICE Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 314(a) and § 324(a), after review of discretionary and non-merits considerations, institution of inter partes review or post-grant review is denied in the following proceedings:” slip op. at 1
Discretionary denialPatents in suitUS 12,186,474 - Pgr2025-00085InstitutedPTAB · Mar 3, 2026 · PGR2025-00085 · APJ John A Squires · PGR · Institution
Institution is granted in PGR2025-00085 because the petitioner met the applicable institution threshold and no non-discretionary considerations warrant denial.
RulingsInstitution decision- PTAB / AIA Trials › Institution threshold (reasonable likelihood / more likely than not)InstitutedInstituted
“Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 314(a) and § 324(a), after review of the merits, the petitioner has shown a reasonable likelihood of prevailing with respect to at least one of the claims challenged in the petition, or that it is more likely than not that at least one of the claims challenged in the petition is unpatentable, as applicable, and no other non-discretionary considerations warrant denial of institution. Accordingly, institution of inter partes review or post-grant review is granted in the following proceedings:” slip op. at 2
NonePatents in suitUS 12,168,036 - Pgr2025-00086InstitutedPTAB · Mar 3, 2026 · PGR2025-00086 · APJ John A Squires · PGR · Institution
The Director granted institution of PGR2025-00086 after finding the petition met the merits threshold and no non-discretionary considerations warranted denial.
RulingsInstitution decision- PTAB / AIA Trials › Institution threshold (reasonable likelihood / more likely than not)InstitutedInstituted
“Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 314(a) and § 324(a), after review of the merits, the petitioner has shown a reasonable likelihood of prevailing with respect to at least one of the claims challenged in the petition, or that it is more likely than not that at least one of the claims challenged in the petition is unpatentable, as applicable, and no other non-discretionary considerations warrant denial of institution. Accordingly, institution of inter partes review or post-grant review is granted in the following proceedings:” slip op. at 2
NonePatents in suitUS 12,290,598 - Pgr2025-00081InstitutedPTAB · Feb 18, 2026 · PGR2025-00081 · APJ John A Squires · PGR · Institution
The Director granted PGR2025-00081 after finding the petitioner showed a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on at least one challenged claim, with no other non-discretionary consideration warranting denial.
RulingsInstitution decision- PTAB / AIA Trials › Institution threshold (reasonable likelihood / more likely than not)InstitutedInstituted
“merits, the petitioner has shown a reasonable likelihood of prevailing with respect to at least one of the claims challenged in the petition, or that it is more likely than not that at least one of the claims challenged in the petition is unpatentable, as applicable, and no other non-discretionary considerations warrant denial of institution. Accordingly, institution of inter partes review or post-grant review is granted in the following proceedings:” slip op. at 2
NonePatents in suitUS 12,163,947 - Pgr2025-00071InstitutedPTAB · Feb 18, 2026 · PGR2025-00071 · APJ John A Squires · PGR · Institution
The Director granted institution of PGR2025-00071 after finding the petition met the applicable threshold and no non-discretionary consideration warranted denial.
RulingsInstitution decision- PTAB / AIA Trials › Institution threshold (reasonable likelihood / more likely than not)InstitutedInstituted
“merits, the petitioner has shown a reasonable likelihood of prevailing with respect to at least one of the claims challenged in the petition, or that it is more likely than not that at least one of the claims challenged in the petition is unpatentable, as applicable, and no other non-discretionary considerations warrant denial of institution. Accordingly, institution of inter partes review or post-grant review is granted in the following proceedings: IPR2025-01267 IPR2025-01461 PGR2025-00071 IPR2025-01364 IPR2025-014874 PGR2025-00081 IPR2025-01431 IPR2025-01516” slip op. at 2
- Director reviewOther
“Before JOHN A. SQUIRES, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office.” slip op. at 1
NonePatents in suitUS 12,308,087 - Pgr2025-00082InstitutedPTAB · Feb 10, 2026 · PGR2025-00082 · APJ John A Squires · PGR · Institution
Institution of post-grant review in PGR2025-00082 is granted because the petitioner showed the required likelihood of prevailing and no non-discretionary consideration warrants denial.
RulingsInstitution decision- PTAB / AIA Trials › Institution threshold (reasonable likelihood / more likely than not)InstitutedInstituted
“merits, the petitioner has shown a reasonable likelihood of prevailing with respect to at least one of the claims challenged in the petition, or that it is more likely than not that at least one of the claims challenged in the petition is unpatentable, as applicable, and no other non-discretionary considerations warrant denial of institution. Accordingly, institution of inter partes review or post-grant review is granted in the following proceedings:” slip op. at 2
NonePatents in suitUS 12,243,948
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.