PTAB
Advanced fields
16 decisions · 306msnewest first
  • PTAB · Jan 24, 2025 · IPR2024-00276 · APJ Michael J Fitzpatrick · IPR · Adverse judgment

    The Board entered adverse judgment against Patent Owner on all challenged claims, 1–3, 6, 12, 14, 16, 18, and 19, after their disclaimer, and terminated the IPR.

    RulingsAdverse judgment
    • Adverse judgmentAdverse judgmentGranted

      “Request For Adverse Judgment. Paper 21 (“Mot.”). In the Joint Motion, the parties “jointly move to terminate the present inter partes review proceeding in light of the disclaimer filed by Patent Owner disclaiming all challenged claims.” Mot. 1 (citing 37 C.F.R. § 42.73; Ex. 2001). The cited exhibit is a disclaimer, filed October 24, 2024, under 37 C.F.R. § 1.321(a), of claims 1–3, 6, 12, 14, 16, 18, and 19 of the ’194 patent, which constitute all of the claims challenged in the inter partes review. Ex. 2001. In view of the disclaimer, “Patent Owner requests entry of adverse judgment as to [the challenged and now disclaimed] claims.” Mot. 1. We grant the Motion. Accordingly, it is: ORDERED that adverse judgment is entered against Patent Owner as” slip op. at 2

    None
    Patents in suitUS 9,415,194
  • PTAB · Jan 24, 2025 · IPR2024-00275 · APJ Michael J Fitzpatrick · IPR · Adverse judgment

    The Board entered adverse judgment against Patent Owner on all challenged, disclaimed claims and terminated the inter partes review.

    RulingsAdverse judgment
    • Adverse judgmentAdverse judgmentGranted

      “C.F.R. § 1.321(a), of claims 9, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22–24, 44, and 46 of the ’597 patent, which constitute all of the claims challenged in the inter partes review. Ex. 2001. In view of the disclaimer, “Patent Owner requests entry of adverse judgment as to [the challenged and now disclaimed] claims.” Mot. 1. We grant the Motion. Accordingly, it is: ORDERED that adverse judgment is entered against Patent Owner as to claims 9, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22–24, 44, and 46 of U.S. Patent No. 9,072,597 B2; and FURTHER ORDERED that the inter partes review is terminated.” slip op. at 2

    None
    Patents in suitUS 9,072,597
  • PTAB · Aug 28, 2024 · IPR2023-01347 · APJ Sheridan K Snedden · IPR · Adverse judgment

    The Board granted Patent Owner’s unopposed request for adverse judgment and cancelled claim 16 after Patent Owner disclaimed all interest in it.

    RulingsAdverse judgment
    • Adverse judgmentAdverse judgmentGranted

      “DISCUSSION Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b), “[a] party may request judgment against itself at any time during a proceeding.” While the motion for adverse judgment was initiated by Petitioner, Patent Owner does not oppose the motion and the record shows that Patent Owner has disclaimed all interest in claim 161 such that Patent Owner has no remaining claim in the trial, actions that are construed to be a request for adverse judgment. Id.” slip op. at 3

    None
    Patents in suitUS 10,633,344
  • PTAB · Jul 1, 2024 · IPR2023-00810 · APJ Jeffrey W Abraham · IPR · Adverse judgment

    The Board entered adverse judgment against Patent Owner on claims 1–30 after it disclaimed the entire term of the patent.

    RulingsAdverse judgment
    • Adverse judgmentAdverse judgmentGranted

      “The Board construes the disclaimer of a patent as a request for adverse judgment. 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b)(1) (“Actions construed to be a request for adverse judgment include . . . [d]isclaimer of the involved . . . patent.”). In this case, the Board instituted trial on claims 1–30 of the ’971 patent, and Patent Owner subsequently filed a disclaimer of the entire term of the ’971 Patent. Ex. 2002. Accordingly, we construe Patent Owner’s disclaimer as a request for adverse judgment, and we grant that request.” slip op. at 2

    None
    Patents in suitUS 11,376,971
  • PTAB · Jan 27, 2022 · IPR2020-01415 · APJ Steven M Amundson · IPR · Adverse judgment

    The Board entered adverse judgment against Patent Owner on claims 1–19 after finding he abandoned the contest by failing to file mandatory notices or other papers.

    RulingsAdverse judgment
    • Adverse judgmentAdverse judgmentGranted

      “adverse judgment should not be entered against Patent Owner in view of his failure to file mandatory notices. Paper 8. The Order explained that the Board’s rules provide that “[a] party may request adverse judgment against itself at any time during a proceeding” and that “[a]ctions construed to be a request for adverse judgment include . . . [a]bandonment of the contest.” Id. at 3 (quoting 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b)). The Order also explained that “[f]ailure to participate in a proceeding, such as failure to file mandatory notices according to 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b), may be considered abandonment of the contest and result in adverse judgment against a patent owner under 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b).” Id. (citing Cellpak, Inc. v. Mambate USA Inc., IPR2021-00007, Paper 4 at 2 (PTAB Mar. 23, 2021)). The Order gave” slip op. at 3

    None
    Patents in suitUS 8,112,405
  • PTAB · Jan 19, 2022 · IPR2021-00416 · APJ Steven M Amundson · IPR · Adverse judgment

    The Board entered adverse judgment against Patent Owner after it requested judgment following cancellation of claims 1–20 in a reissue application, and terminated the proceeding.

    RulingsAdverse judgment
    • Adverse judgmentAdverse judgmentGranted

      “The Board’s rules provide that “[a] party may request judgment against itself at any time during a proceeding.” 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b)(2). Because Patent Owner requests adverse judgment and Petitioner does not oppose, the entry of judgment adverse to Patent Owner is appropriate.” slip op. at 2

    None
    Patents in suitUS 10,079,737
  • PTAB · Jan 28, 2016 · IPR2015-01841 · APJ Howard B Blankenship · IPR · Adverse judgment

    The Board entered adverse judgment against Patent Owner on claims 1, 17, and 61 after their statutory disclaimer, and terminated the proceeding.

    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 as a request for entry of adverse 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)). No claim remains to be adjudicated in this proceeding. ORDER Accordingly, it is ORDERED that adverse judgment is entered against Patent Owner with respect to claims 1, 17, and 61 of the ’347 patent; and FURTHER ORDERED that this proceeding is terminated.” slip op. at 2

    None
    Patents in suitUS 7,688,347
  • PTAB · Dec 16, 2015 · IPR2015-01342 · APJ Howard B Blankenship · IPR · Adverse judgment

    The Board entered adverse judgment against Patent Owner on claims 1, 17–19, 27, 28, 60, 61, 68, and 71–73 and terminated the proceeding.

    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 as a request for entry of adverse 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)). No claim remains to be adjudicated in this proceeding. ORDER Accordingly, it is ORDERED that adverse judgment is entered against Patent Owner with respect to claims 1, 17–19, 27, 28, 60, 61, 68, and 71–73 of the ’347 patent; and” slip op. at 2

    None
    Patents in suitUS 7,688,347
  • PTAB · Dec 16, 2015 · CBM2015-00050 · APJ Richard E Rice · CBM · Adverse judgment

    The Board granted adverse judgment based on Patent Owner’s abandonment and cancelled claims 51, 52, and 55–57 of U.S. Patent No. 7,603,674 B2.

    RulingsAdverse judgment
    • Adverse judgmentAdverse judgmentGranted

      “Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b)(4), a party may request judgment against itself at any time during a proceeding. Actions construed to be a request for such an adverse judgment include abandonment of the contest. We find that Patent Owner’s actions and admissions, as set forth in the Motion, constitute abandonment of these CBM Proceedings, and we determine based on such abandonment that Patent Owner has requested adverse judgment under 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b)(4) in both proceedings.” slip op. at 2

    None
    Patents in suitUS 7,603,674
  • PTAB · Dec 16, 2015 · CBM2015-00049 · APJ Richard E Rice · CBM · Adverse judgment

    The Board granted adverse judgment based on Patent Owner’s abandonment and ordered claims 22–23, 27–29 of the ’749 patent and claims 51–52, 55–57 of the ’674 patent cancelled.

    RulingsAdverse judgment
    • Adverse judgmentAdverse judgmentGranted

      “Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b)(4), a party may request judgment against itself at any time during a proceeding. Actions construed to be a request for such an adverse judgment include abandonment of the contest. We find that Patent Owner’s actions and admissions, as set forth in the Motion, constitute abandonment of these CBM Proceedings, and we determine based on such abandonment that Patent Owner has requested adverse judgment under 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b)(4) in both proceedings.” slip op. at 2

    None
    Patents in suitUS 7,062,749
Page 1 of 2
← Previous12Next →

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.