DynaIP entity, Cloud Systems HoldCo IP, IoT patent challenge instituted

On July 12, 2024, four weeks after Unified filed an ex parte reexamination, the Central Reexamination Unit (CRU) granted Unified’s request, finding substantial new questions of patentability on the challenged claims of U.S. Patent 8,533,326, owned and asserted by Cloud Systems HoldCo IP, LLC, an NPE and DynaIP entity.  The ’326 patent focuses on a system and method for efficiently managing and routing data among multiple devices within a given environment. It was asserted against Philips North America.

View district court litigations by Cloud Systems HoldCo IP. Unified is represented by in-house counsel, Jordan Rossen and David Seastrunk, in this proceeding.

To view the reexamination request, visit Unified’s Portal: https://portal.unifiedpatents.com/exparte/90019532

Voice Tech open source patent affirmed invalid by Federal Circuit

On August 1, 2024, the Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Office's final decision confirming that all claims (1-8) of U.S. Patent 10,491,679 were unpatentable. Owned and asserted by Voice Tech Corp, the ’679 patent relates to voice-activated computing. The patent was asserted against Linux-based technology from Mycroft AI for using open source, voice-related features. This invalid patent has been blamed for the closure of Mycroft AI.

View district court litigation by Voice Tech Corp. To read the petition and view the case record, see Unified's Portal. Unified was represented by in-house counsel, Jordan Rossen, Roshan Mansinghani, and Michelle Aspen, in this proceeding. Adam Erickson from Haynes and Boone handled the argument on appeal.

Comments submitted to the USPTO over AI impacts on prior art

Through policy advocacy work with Unified Edge, Unified Patents has submitted comments to the USPTO's request for comments regarding the impact of the proliferation of artificial intelligence (AI) on prior art, the knowledge of a person having ordinary skill in the art, and determinations of patentability made in view of the foregoing.

Unified has suggested that the USPTO may need to be wary of unscrupulous actors creating AI data dumps, including using bulk patent applications at the USPTO itself to create patent thickets.

Read through Unified’s comments by clicking on the button below:

Atlantic IP entity, Foras Technologies, parallel processor patent found invalid

On July 26, 2024, the Central Reexamination Unit (CRU) entered a final rejection of the challenged claims 1-2, 5-18, and 21-30 of U.S. Patent 7,627,781, owned and asserted by Foras Technologies, Ltd., an NPE and entity of Atlantic IP Services Limited. The ‘781 patent relates to lockstep processor technology where two processors are paired together, and the two processors perform exactly the same-operations and the results-are compared.(e.g., with an XOR gate). The patent has been asserted against Toyota and Nissan.

View district court litigations by Foras Technologies. Unified was represented by Greenberg Traurig and by in-house counsel, T.J. Murphy and Roshan Mansinghani, in these proceedings.

To view the reexamination request, visit Unified’s Portal: https://portal.unifiedpatents.com/exparte/90019244

CellSpinsoft data transfer patent challenge instituted

On July 25, 2024, three months after Unified filed an ex parte reexamination, the Central Reexamination Unit (CRU) granted Unified’s request, finding substantial new questions of patentability on the challenged claims of U.S. Patent 8,904,030, owned and asserted by Cellspinsoft, Inc., an NPE. The ‘030 patent is generally directed to uploading data to a remote server, where the data comes from a device that does not have network connectivity. The data is transferred from the capturing device to a mobile device via Bluetooth and then the mobile device uploads the data. The system is set up so that the capturing device can notify the mobile device when new data is available to upload. It has been asserted against LifeScan, Senseonics, and ByteDance.

View district court litigations by Cellspinsoft. Unified is represented by Raghav Bajaj of Haynes Boone, and by in-house counsel, Jessica L.A. Marks, Alyssa Holtslander, and Roshan Mansinghani, in this proceeding.

To view the reexamination request, visit Unified’s Portal: https://portal.unifiedpatents.com/exparte/90019499