On February 21, 2014, Google Inc, filed IPR2014-00452 on U.S. Patent No. 6,323,853 ib Method, System, and Computer Readable Medium for Addressing Handing from a Computer Program.
Intel Corporation filed five inter partes reviews against the one patent: IPR2014-00443, IPR2014-00444, IPR2014-00445, IPR2014-00446, IPR2014-00447, all challenge U.S. Pat. 7,147,759 on HIGH-POWER PULSED MAGNETRON SPUTTERING owned by Zond, Inc. in 443, Intel used 60 pages to challenge claims 1, 4, 10-12, 17, 18 and 44 of the ’759 Patent; in 444 Intel used 60 pages to challenge claims 2, 3, 5-9, 13-16, 19, 41-43 and 45 of the ’759 Patent; in 445 Intel used 60 pages to challenge claims 20, 21, 34-36, 38, 39, 47 and 49 of the ‘759 Patent; in 446 Intel used 60 pages to challenge claims 22-33, 37, 46, 48, and 50 of the ’759 Patent; and in 447 Intel used 54 pages to challenge claim 40 of the ’759 Patent.
Google, Inc., filed IPR2014-00450 against U.S. Pat. 7,921,356, on METHOD, SYSTEM AND COMPUTER READABLE MEDIUM FOR ADDRESSING HANDLING FROM A COMPUTER PROGRAM, owned by Arendi S.A.R.L.
Edwards Lifesciences Corp., filed IPR2014-00453 against U.S. Pat. 8,623,077 on APPARATUS FOR REPLACING A CARDIAC VALVE, owned by Medtronic, Inc.
Cisco Systems, Inc., filed IPR2014-00454 against U.S. Pat, 5,563,883 on DYNAMIC CHANNEL MANAGEMENT AND SIGNALLING METHOD AND APPARATUS owned by C-Cation Technologies, LLC.
The PTAB’s decision in Microsoft Corp. v. Proxyconn, Inc., IPR2013-00026, IPR2013-00109, Paper 73, (February 19, 2014) is notable because for the first time a challenged claim (claim 24) survived the IPR Process, although 8 of the 9 claims for which trial was instituted were found invalid. This makes the “kill” rate for patent claims in the first eight decisions 110/111 or 99.1%.
The other final written decisions so far are: Garmin International, Inc. v. Cuozzo Speed Technologies LLC, IPR2012-00001, Paper 59 (November 13, 2013) all three of the claims for which trial was instituted were found invalid; Idle Free Systems, Inc. v. Bergstrom, Inc., IPR2012-00027, Paper 66 (January 7, 2014), all 23 of the claims were found invalid, 9 by concession by the patent owner, and 14 by decision of the Board; Intellectual Ventures Management, LLC v. XILINX, Inc., IPR2013-00023, Paper 35 (February 11, 2014), all 19 claims were found invalid; Intellectual Ventures Management, LLC v. XILINX, Inc., IPR2013-00020, Paper 34 (February 11, 2014), all 12 of the claims for which trial was instituted were found invalid. Nicia Corp. v. Emcore Corporation, IPR2012-00005, Paper 68, (February 11, 2014), all 17 claims were found invalid; Intellectual Ventures Management, LLC v. XILINX, Inc., IPR2013-00019, Paper 33 (February 10, 2014), all 15 of the claims were found invalid; Intellectual Ventures Management, LLC v. XILINX, Inc., IPR2013-00018, Paper 35 (February 10, 2014), all 13 of the claims were found invalid.
Decision Denying Institution
In Medtronic, Inc. v.Nuivasive, Inc., IPR2013-00504, Paper 8 (February 13, 2014) the Board denied inter partes review because the Petition did not explain how the prior art met the claim limitiations. The geometry of the prior art did not match the claimed geometry. The Board continues its careful review of the Petitions.