IPVal entity Rosen Technologies thermostat patent held invalid

On February 28, 2024, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued a final written decision in Unified Patents, LLC v. Rosen Technologies LLC holding all challenged claims of U.S. Patent 7,156,318 unpatentable. Owned and asserted by Rosen Technologies LLC, an NPE and entity of IP Valuation Partners, the ‘318 patent is directed to a programmable thermostat having virtual buttons that control space conditioning equipment. It had been asserted against Resideo Technologies and Lennox International, and most recently, Ecobee.

View district court litigations by Rosen Technologies. To read the petition and view the case record, see Unified’s Portal. Unified was represented by Duane Morris and by in-house counsel, T.J. Murphy and Roshan Mansinghani, in this proceeding.

Virtual Creative Artists social networking patent invalidated

On February 9, 2024, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued a final written decision in Unified Patents, LLC v. Virtual Creative Artists, LLC holding all challenged claims of U.S. Patent 10,339,576 unpatentable. The '576 patent is directed towards a process for creating and publishing media content on an electronic exchange. It had been asserted against Meta, Bumble, Pinterest, Snap, TikTok, and Tumblr.

View district court litigations by Virtual Creative Artists. To read the petition and view the case record, see Unified’s Portal. Unified was represented by Eric Buresh and Nick Apel of Erise IP, and by in-house counsel, David Seastrunk and Roshan Mansinghani, in this proceeding.

Ideahub HEVC patent held invalid

On February 5, 2024, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued a final written decision in Unified Patents, LLC v. Ideahub Inc. holding all challenged claims of U.S. Patent 11,122,274 unpatentable. The '274 patent generally relates to a video compression method for improving compression efficiency in directional intra-prediction. The patent has been designated essential to the Access Advance patent pool and this filing is part of Unified’s continued efforts in the SEP Video Codec Zone.

View district court litigation by Ideahub. To read the petition and view the case record, see Unified's Portal.  Unified is represented by Raghav Bajaj and David McCombs of Hayes Boone, and by in-house counsel Roshan Mansinghani and Michelle Aspen.

IV's PTAB rehearing request denied

On January 16, 2024, Intellectual Ventures’s request for rehearing of IPR2022-00429 was denied by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). The IPR was filed against U.S. Patent 9,291,475 on February 10, 2022, was instituted on August 11, 2022, and received a final written decision holding all claims invalid on February 9, 2023. The ’475 patent relates to alerting a recipient regarding a violation of a vehicle, such as a speeding violation, and had been asserted in district court against Toyota, GM, and Honda.

View district court litigations by Intellectual Ventures. To read the petition and view the case record, see Unified’s Portal. Unified was represented by in-house counsel, Alyssa Holtslander, Roshan Mansinghani, and Michelle Aspen.

IP Investments Group entity DigiMedia H.264/AVC patent held invalid

On January 12, 2024, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued a final written decision in Unified Patents, LLC v. DigiMedia Tech LLC, holding one challenged claim of U.S. Patent 6,473,532 unpatentable, and that another challenged claim could not be ruled on due to an antecedent basis issue (i.e., likely rendering that claim indefinite, or if not, unpatentable; see pp. 36-41 of the decision). Owned and asserted by DigiMedia Tech, an NPE and an IP Investments Group entity, the ‘532 patent relates generally to processing and encoding of video images for later compression by standard compression techniques. The patent had been asserted against ViacomCBS, Lenovo, Panasonic, and OnePlus, and is currently being asserted against TCT Mobile and Xiaomi.

View district court litigations by DigiMedia Tech. To read the petition and view the case record, see Unified’s Portal. Unified was represented by Trenton Ward (now at Greenberg Traurig) and William Neer at Finnegan, and by in-house counsel, David Seastrunk and Roshan Mansinghani, in this proceeding.