• All Courts
  • Federal Courts
  • Bankruptcies
  • PTAB
  • ITC
Track Search
Export
Download All
Displaying 114-128 of 818 results

7 Order: Granting Petitioners Request for Additional Briefing37 CFR 425 37 CFR 42108c

Document IPR2020-00290, No. 7 Order - Granting Petitioners Request for Additional Briefing37 CFR 425 37 CFR 42108c (P.T.A.B. May. 22, 2020)
Fintiv identifies a non-exclusive list of factors parties may consider addressing when considering whether a related, parallel district court action provides any basis for discretionary denial under NHK.
Upon considering the parties’ positions, we found that it would be helpful for the parties to provide additional briefing on whether the Board should exercise its discretion to deny institution under § 325(d) in IPR2020- 00289 and IPR2020-00290.
The parties may submit additional evidence from the prosecution history of the challenged patents to support any facts asserted in the supplemental briefing regarding discretion under § 325(d).
Patent Owner responded that the Petition does not cite any evidence showing when Khanna was publicly accessible, and Petitioner should not be allowed to do so for the first time in a reply.
After considering the parties’ positions, in IPR2020-00292, we authorize Petitioner to respond in its reply to Patent Owner’s argument in the Preliminary Response regarding Khanna’s status as a prior art printed publication.
cite Cite Document

8 Other other: Joint Request that Agreements be Treated as Business Confidential Information and be Kept Separate

Document IPR2023-00541, No. 8 Other other - Joint Request that Agreements be Treated as Business Confidential Information and be Kept Separate (P.T.A.B. Apr. 26, 2023)
Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c), Petitioner Intel Corporation and Patent Owner Greenthread LLC jointly request that the confidential settlement-related agreements (Exhibits 2001 and 2002) filed concurrently herewith, as referenced in the Joint Motion to Terminate Inter Partes Review: (a) be treated as business confidential information; (b) be kept separate from the file of the involved patent; and (c) be made available only as permitted pursuant to the provisions of 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c).
Intel and Greenthread also respectfully request that the Board inform them if anyone seeks production of the agreements and afford them an opportunity to address whether such request is supported by good cause.
cite Cite Document

5 Notice Updated Mandatory Notice: Updated Mandatory Notice

Document IPR2023-00541, No. 5 Notice Updated Mandatory Notice - Updated Mandatory Notice (P.T.A.B. Feb. 23, 2023)
Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(a)(3), Patent Owner, Greenthread, LLC, hereby files its Updated Mandatory Notice.
adopts the previous Mandatory Notices made by Greenthread, LLC as to the real party-in-interest, related matters, and service information.
cite Cite Document

3 Notice Mandatory Notice: Notice Mandatory Notice

Document IPR2023-00541, No. 3 Notice Mandatory Notice - Notice Mandatory Notice (P.T.A.B. Feb. 10, 2023)
• A Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 11,121,222 is currently pending before the Board in Sony Group Corporation v. Greenthread, LLC, IPR2023-00324, filed on December 12, 2022.
• A Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 11,316,014 is currently pending before the Board in Sony Group Corporation v. Greenthread, LLC, IPR2023-00325, filed on December 12, 2022.
• A Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 10,734,481 is currently pending before the Board in Sony Group Corporation v. Greenthread, LLC, IPR2023-00375, filed on December 17, 2022.
• A Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 10,510,842 is currently pending before the Board in Sony Group Corporation v. Greenthread, LLC, IPR2023-00376, filed on December 17, 2022.
• A Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,421,195 is currently pending before the Board in Intel Corporation v. Greenthread, LLC, IPR2023-00548, filed on January 30, 2023.
cite Cite Document

4 Notice Power of Attorney: Notice Power of Attorney

Document IPR2023-00541, No. 4 Notice Power of Attorney - Notice Power of Attorney (P.T.A.B. Feb. 10, 2023)
Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(b), Patent Owner, Greenthread, LLC, hereby appoints all practitioners associated with McKool Smith, P.C., Customer Number 127134, including the following lead and backup counsel, as its attorneys to transact all business in the United States Patent and Trademark Office associated with the above-captioned Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 9,190,502.
U.S. Patent No. 9,190,502 The undersigned is authorized to act on behalf ofPatent Owner, Greenthread, LLC.
Dated: February 9, 2023 Greenthread, LLC
cite Cite Document

5 Notice of Filing Date Accorded to Petition: Notice of Accord Filing Date

Document IPR2020-00290, No. 5 Notice of Filing Date Accorded to Petition - Notice of Accord Filing Date (P.T.A.B. Jan. 15, 2020)
For more information, please consult the Office Patent Trial Practice Guide, 77 Fed. Reg. 48756 (Aug. 14, 2012), which is available on the Board Web site at http://www.uspto.gov/PTAB.
Patent Owner is advised of the requirement to submit mandatory notice information under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(a)(2) within 21 days of service of the petition.
The parties are advised that under 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c), recognition of counsel pro hac vice requires a showing of good cause.
Many non-profit organizations, both inside and outside the intellectual property field, offer alternative dispute resolution services.
If the parties actually engage in alternative dispute resolution, the PTAB would be interested to learn what mechanism (e.g., arbitration, mediation, etc.) was used and the general result.
cite Cite Document

1034 Exhibit: Redacted District Court Case Transfer Order

Document IPR2023-00541, No. 1034 Exhibit - Redacted District Court Case Transfer Order (P.T.A.B. Jan. 30, 2023)
Plaintiff Greenthread, LLC (“Greenthread”) sued Intel Corporation (“Intel”) and Dell Inc./Dell Technologies Inc. (“Dell”), for alleged infringement of patents directed to certain manufacturing steps for semiconductor devices.
This case differs from Nintendo, though, because Greenthread amended its Complaint to accuse Dell of infringement based on products sold by unrelated manufacturers before Intel filed this Motion.
Yet the Federal Circuit has refused to apply the rule “rigidly,” such as where it may “result in all identified witnesses having to travel away from their home and work in order to testify in Texas, which would ‘produce results divorced from’ the rule’s underlying rationale.” In re Google LLC, No. 2021-170, 2021 WL 4427899, at *5 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 27, 2021) (quoting In re TracFone Wireless, Inc., 852 F. App’x 537, 539 (Fed. Cir. 2021)).
Or Intel Ex. 1034 Page 8 to simply disregard any difference in convenience between the relevant fora where it is comfortable concluding that a witness would have to travel a significant distance no matter if the action is transferred or not.
While Intel argues that this factor should be neutral because this Court has a larger number of patent cases compared to the District of Oregon, ECF No. 60 at 14, Greenthread correctly asserts that Oregon’s average time to trial is slower than this Court’s.
cite Cite Document

2 Notice Power of Attorney: Notice Power of Attorney

Document IPR2023-00541, No. 2 Notice Power of Attorney - Notice Power of Attorney (P.T.A.B. Jan. 30, 2023)
Petitioner’s Power of Attorney in Connection with Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 9,190,502
Petitioner’s Power of Attorney in Connection with Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 9,190,502 Petitioner Intel Corporation hereby appoints the following practitioners as its attorneys to transact all business in the United State Patent & Trademark Office associates with the above-captioned inter partes review.
cite Cite Document

1 Petition as filed: Petition as filed

Document IPR2023-00541, No. 1 Petition as filed - Petition as filed (P.T.A.B. Jan. 30, 2023)
Thus, according to Jastrzebski, Kamins, Applicant, and PO, Payne’s profile generates a (first) “built-in” static unidirectional electric drift field (illustrated by the yellow arrow labelled “E1” below left) that aids the movement of minority carriers from the surface layer to the substrate.6 Ex.1003, ¶¶102-103.
Payne’s Figure 11 shows that the dopant concentration is downward- sloping with increasing depth over the entire well region, and thus, according to PO (and also in light of Applicant’s representations to the Patent Office, discussed in §X.A.1.f), generates a static unidirectional electric drift field that aids the movement of minority carriers downward from the surface layer to the substrate.
Thus, according to §X.A.1.f, including Applicant’s repeated representations to the Patent Office and the Jastrzebski and Kamins cited art relied on by Applicant, such a downward-sloping graded-dopant concentration generates a “built-in” unidirectional electric drift field (illustrated “E1” below) to aid the movement of minority carriers from the surface layer to the substrate.
It was also known to fabricate semiconductor flash memory devices to achieve the benefits of “high density [], small-die size, lower cost, and hot-electron writability of EPROMs, together with the easy erasability, on-board reprogrammability, and electron- tunneling erasure features of EEPROMs,” and to do so using CMOS technology for “lower power-dissipation.” Ex.1008B, 632-634; Ex.1008A, 808-810; Ex.1003, ¶199.
In Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 9,190,502 fact, the prosecution history record is clear that the Examiner erroneously considered Hong (Ex.1027)—which is not prior art because it was filed on August 31, 2005, long after the claimed priority date of the ’502 Patent—to be “the closest reference.” Id.
cite Cite Document

No. 85 REDACTION to 78 SEALED MOTION - Greenthread, LLC's Partially Opposed Motion for Leave to Amend ...

Document Greenthread, LLC v. SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. et al, 2:19-cv-00147, No. 85 (E.D.Tex. Jun. 11, 2020)
Greenthread sent a January 15, 2020 letter noting the significant deficiencies in Samsung’s technical document production and requesting that Samsung comply with its discovery obligations ahead of the February 19, 2020 deadline for substantial completion.
Specifically, for the charted DRAM device, as Greenthread noted in its original contentions, “a portion of the embedded p-well profile closest to the surface has likely been truncated during sample preparation,” (Ex. 1 at 19; Ex. 3 at 19), and “the drift layer
On May 8, 2020, Samsung argued for the first time that the accused products do not infringe because: 6 With respect to the electric fields located in the p-well, Greenthread has made no change to the labels for this figure other than to specify that the "minority carriers" are electrons.
In its original contentions for both DRAM and NAND flash products, Greenthread identified the p-wells and deep n-well beneath the memory cell arrays as satisfying this "2-way graded dopant" limitation.
In Mediostream, the court found that denying leave to amend infringement contentions to add information obtained during discovery would prevent the plaintiff from pursuing its case and asserting its patents.
cite Cite Document

No. 15

Document Greenthread, LLC v. SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. et al, 2:19-cv-00147, No. 15 (E.D.Tex. Sep. 3, 2019)

cite Cite Document

No. 1

Document Greenthread, LLC v. SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. et al, 2:19-cv-00147, No. 1 (E.D.Tex. Apr. 30, 2019)

cite Cite Document

11 Motion: Joint Motion to Seal and to Enter the Default Protective Order

Document IPR2020-00290, No. 11 Motion - Joint Motion to Seal and to Enter the Default Protective Order (P.T.A.B. Jul. 9, 2020)

cite Cite Document

10 Motion: Joint Motion to Dismiss

Document IPR2020-00290, No. 10 Motion - Joint Motion to Dismiss (P.T.A.B. Jul. 9, 2020)

cite Cite Document

9 Reply: Patent Owners Sur Reply

Document IPR2020-00290, No. 9 Reply - Patent Owners Sur Reply (P.T.A.B. Jun. 11, 2020)

cite Cite Document
<< 1 2 3 4 5 ... 8 9 10 11 12 ... >>