Posts Tagged: "patent filings roundup"

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) filings held at 25 this week, with one post grant review (PGR) and 24 inter partes reviews (IPRs); district court patent filings jumped significantly, however, to 95, with Cannon’s lengthy scorched-earth filings against dozens of competitors making up the bulk of that jump. The IPRs were propped up by a handful of Samsung-filed petitions against Aquis; Samsung also continued to trickle out petitions against Ericsson related to the now-infamous FRAND 5G rate case ping-ponging between China and the Eastern District of Texas. Hisense and LG filed a number of IPRs related to a semiconductor dispute with Polaris, and Qualcomm continued to battle Vector Capital-backed Monterey Research at the Board over non-practicing entity (NPE) semiconductor assertions, earning institution on at least three of the IPRs they’ve filed to date. And Amazon is having mixed luck with IPRs against a failed voice technology company they have a long history with.

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) filings are way down for the third week in a row, with 15 inter partes reviews (IPRs) and two post grant reviews (PGRs) filed compared to 59 district court complaints. A few big-ticket suits were renewed—the older capital-backed Fundamental Innovation Systems International [Centerbridge Partners] and Solas Oled [Magentar Capital] suits saw new defendants—and some well-known smaller ones soldiered on.  The aggressive EcoFactor competitive suit rolls on in the ITC and now across Texas, with a number of new suits filed by the IoT company. There’s a new suit by a Quest Patent Research Corp subsidiary and a smattering of other campaign-adds listed below; and it’s worth noting that DynaIP subsidiaries have exploded with litigation these past few months, with the forecast promising more rain on the horizon.

A light week at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) saw two post grant reviews (PGRs) and 16 inter partes reviews (IPRs) filed, while the District Court clocked in with 49 new complaints, fueled mostly by additions to a few Rothschild campaigns, a few new IV selloff suits, a new defendant added to the WSOU madness (this time, Netgear), and a fair number of competitor suits, pharmaceutical suits, and even a new Gil Hyatt complaint. Oso IP subsidiary Boccone, LLC walked away from their three patents entirely, post-institution. Samsung and a few others had petitions denied under Section 314 discretion (the power of which was really driven home this week when VLSI earned a $2 billion judgment on patents that had been challenged but denied institution under that rubric).

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) filings have settled into a relatively steady-state of roughly 20-30 petitions, occasionally punctuated by a big burst of litigation-related activity. Notably, five of the 34 petitions filed were post grant reviews (PGRs), as the numbers there continue to (very slowly) creep up from nothing. In the district courts, a relatively typical 76 patent filings hit dockets across the nation, including some newer names—and some old ones just now resurfacing. For example, Computer Circuit Operations LLC is back (after filing and settling six suits last year, five in the Western District of Texas). Acacia has a new(ish) campaign (Stingray IP Solutions, LLC) and some new suits in an old campaign (R2 Solutions LLC).

Filings reverted to the mean this week, with 31 Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) filings (5 post grant reviews and 25 inter partes reviews) and roughly double that (61) for new district court patent complaints. Another four or so denials under Fintiv came this week, mostly over district court trials in Judge Gilstrap’s Eastern District of Texas court—in one case, over a significant relationship with previous petitioners, albeit as part of a set of earlier-reported-on cases. See IPR2020-01101, IPR2020-01358, IPR2020-01399, IPR2020-01400 (affecting Mitek, a group of UAB companies, and Samsung). A few new LLC players—Gesture Technology Partners, LLC, Repeat Precision, LLC—were added in a week that saw relatively few non-practicing entity (NPE) suits and plenty of competitor suits.

District court patent filings exploded this week with 126, while Patent Trial and Appeal Board filings were down substantially, with just 11 inter partes reviews (IPRs) and two post grant reviews (PGRs) filed. The district courts saw the return of serial filer WSOU (this time against F5 Networks) as well as a new round of suits in AGIS Software Development LLC (discussed below), a surprising (even for them) number of new IP Edge suits, and a fair number of new defendants added to existing non-practicing entity (NPE) suits. Raymond Anthony Joao continues to add defendants quickly to various subsidiaries, and Leigh Rothschild had a few new cases, in a week dominated by NPE filings.

District Court patent filings were down again this week with just 46—two thirds of usual output—and the continued absence of any new WSOU filings may point to some kind of strategy reset (or not;  it could just be a lull.). Board filings were at their usual pace with 32, though a huge portion of those were filed by BMW and Mercedes against Oso IP subsidiary Stragent, LLC or Medtronic (against Speyside Medical, LLC). This week saw another five denials under the Board’s discretion, mostly on cases already reported on.

All eyes this week were on the USPTO Director’s chair and the inauguration, and yesterday the USPTO posted a farewell blog and speech, confirming that Andrei Iancu will (and probably already has) resigned pursuant to the changeover in administrations. But patent filings wait for no one, and so we turn to the just 20 Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) petitions that were filed last week, with the district court on usual pace with 68 complaints. Notably, there were another 10 discretionary denials (and 12 substantive ones), a few highlighted below, and a few developments in district court relevant to Fintiv in general. 

Per the usual slow January, it was a light week at both the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and in the district courts. At the PTAB, parties filed just 16 petitions—three post grant reviews (PGRs) (including a Regeneron filing) and 13 inter partes reviews (IPRs), which, if memory serves, is the lowest of the past 12 months. In district court, just 34 filings played out, with the noted absence (seemingly weekly at this point) of any new WSOU suits.  And, as mentioned previously, there’s still no evidence that Uniloc is moving to correct their filings before the USPTO to include the necessary party, Fortress, as their exclusive licensee.

Combining the holiday break, we see a steady 24 and 25 Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) petitions filed in the last two weeks, respectively, with 84 and 71 District Court complaints filed, respectively. The 84 was again bumped up roughly 10 by another round of WSOU filings, this time against Salesforce; otherwise it was the typical mix of small file-and-settle non-practicing entity (NPE) additions (mostly IP Edge, seemingly filling out some kind of annual quotas, and with a new campaign against shuttle services), bigger funded NPEs like Acacia and Dominion Harbor entities, small filers, and a smattering of company-company filings. Cedar Lane also ended the year strong, adding a few logs to the yule fire.

December remains a light month at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), with just 16 petitions filed last week, 15 inter partes reviews (IPRs) and one post grant review (PGR). District court cases were steady, with 62, propped up by a new banking campaign by Raymond Anthony Joao, detailed below. On the policy front were rumors of a last-minute extension of the covered business method patents program (CBM) being worked into the lame-duck session, but it was unclear whether that was just the rumor mill reacting to Innovation Alliance’s posting of a counter-statement and fact sheet lobbying against an extension so late in the year, or some actual threat of an extension being passed at the eleventh hour. Separately, the Intellectual Property Owners Association (IPO) posted a series of qualities it seeks in a new USPTO Director—mostly generic—including at least 15 years of patent lawyer experience, something I personally think excludes many phenomenal candidates from industry, business, and the inventor community.

New petitions stayed steady again this week at 29, while district court patent filings were one shy of 100, on the strength of at least 35 new complaints by various IP Edge subsidiaries. A number of known-financed entities launched suits or added defendants; Xerox launched a rather serious suit against three social media giants; and the Board denied some petitions based on trial dates and also on there being a significant relationship between suppliers and customers (in the Mitek cases).

Thanksgiving week was another light week at the Patent Trial and Appeals Board (PTAB), with 19 petitions filed (all IPRs).

It was a light week for Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) filings, with just 18 new petitions, while the district courts remained busy with 71 new complaints. Some patent filings were new additions to existing assertion campaigns like Virtual Immersion [Equitable], Cedar Lane Technologies Inc., or Browse3D; at least six new filings by Viking Technologies, LLC seem to spring from a supplier relationship with smartphone repair services, detailed below.

District court activity dropped to 38 new complaints this week, with 28 Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) petitions – one post grant review (PGR) and 27 inter partes reviews (IPRs) – filed. It was a subdued week for WSOU and the usual big filers, with the IPRs propped up by a big funded semiconductor fight with an International Trade Commission (ITC) component.  Dominion Harbor’s Vista Peak Ventures filed against a number of overseas companies, and frequent filer Blue Spike came back with a vengeance, but on the whole, a quieter post-election week all around.