• All Courts
  • Federal Courts
  • Bankruptcies
  • PTAB
  • ITC
Track Search
Export
Download All
Active Filters1
25 results

Maze Innovations, Inc. v. The Green Pet Shop Enterprises, LLC

Docket IPR2016-00117, Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Oct. 30, 2015)
Hyun Jung, Mitchell Weatherly, Scott Daniels, presiding
Case TypeInter Partes Review
Patent
8720218
Petitioner Maze Innovations, Inc.
Patent Owner The Green Pet Shop Enterprises, LLC
cite Cite Docket
Analyze

9 Notice: Notice of Refund

Document IPR2016-00117, No. 9 Notice - Notice of Refund (P.T.A.B. Jun. 8, 2016)
Petitioner’s request for a refund of certain post-institution fees paid on 10/30/2015 in the above proceeding is hereby granted.
The amount of $14,000 has been refunded to the Petitioner’s deposit account.
Case IPR2016-00117 Patent 8,720,218 The parties are reminded that unless otherwise permitted by 37 C.F.R. § 42.6(b)(2), all filings in this proceeding must be made electronically in the Patent Review Processing System (PRPS), accessible from the Board Web site at http://www.uspto.gov/PTAB.
For the PATENT OWNER:
cite Cite Document
Analyze

7 Decision Denying Institution: Decision Denying Institution of Inter Partes Review

Document IPR2016-00117, No. 7 Decision Denying Institution - Decision Denying Institution of Inter Partes Review (P.T.A.B. Apr. 20, 2016)
Log in to see more
cite Cite Document
Analyze

3 Notice of Filing Date Accorded to Petition: Notice of Filing Date Accorded to Petition

Document IPR2016-00117, No. 3 Notice of Filing Date Accorded to Petition - Notice of Filing Date Accorded to Petition (P.T.A.B. Nov. 5, 2015)
The petition for inter partes review in the above proceeding has been accorded the filing date of October 30, 2015.
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.
Such motions shall be filed in accordance with the “Order -- Authorizing Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission” in Case IPR2013-00639, Paper 7, a copy of which is available on the Board Web site under “Representative Orders, Decisions, and Notices.” The parties are reminded that unless otherwise permitted by 37 C.F.R. § 42.6(b)(2), all filings in this proceeding must be made electronically in the Patent Review Processing System (PRPS), accessible from the Board Web site at http://www.uspto.gov/PTAB.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

1 Petition: Petition for Inter Partes Review of US Patent No 8,720,218

Document IPR2016-00117, No. 1 Petition - Petition for Inter Partes Review of US Patent No 8,720,218 (P.T.A.B. Oct. 30, 2015)
Thus, in some embodiments, the channels explicitly do not fully Petition For Inter Partes Review Of U.S. Patent No. 8,720,218 isolate the angled segments from one another, indicating that there is no requirement the elongated grooves reach the perimeter of the cooling mat.
Moreover, a person of skill in the art would understand that extending the reinforcing ribs 6 across the entire cooling platform would further assist in achieving Fan’s stated goals of ventilation and prevention of gel movement among angled segments.
However, as described above, the broadest reasonable interpretation of “pressure” is “contact.” Since Xiong’s PCM only changes phases when heat is transferred due to contact with the hot object, Xiong does disclose this limitation under the claim construction standard applicable here.
Therefore, an artisan would recognize that the incorporation of Xiong’s channels into Fan’s gel pad would predictably result in an improved cooling platform, with each reference contributing its known properties and Petition For Inter Partes Review Of U.S. Patent No. 8,720,218 advantages.
Fan’s and Xiong’s express disclosure of the advantages and necessity of having “channels” to reduce the movement of the composition within the cooling platform constitutes a teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine Fan with Xiong, since both described similar solutions to the same problem.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

8 Refund Request: Request for Refund of Post Institution Fees Under 37 CFR 1925

Document IPR2016-00117, No. 8 Refund Request - Request for Refund of Post Institution Fees Under 37 CFR 1925 (P.T.A.B. Jun. 7, 2016)
On October 30, 2015, Petitioner Maze Innovations, Inc. d/b/a Hugs Pet
Petitioner paid a fee of $23,000.00, including: (i) $9,000.00 for an inter partes review request fee for up to twenty (20) claims; and (ii) $14,000.00 for an inter partes review post-institution fee up to fifteen (15) claims.
On April 20, 2016, the Board denied institution of Inter Partes Review (Paper 7).
Petitioner therefore requests a refund of $14,000.00 for the inter partes review post-institution fee of four (4) claims under (ii) above.
The Patent and Trial Appeal Board is hereby authorized to charge or refund any fees associated with this case to Deposit Account 02-1818.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

6 Preliminary Response: Patent Owner Preliminary Response

Document IPR2016-00117, No. 6 Preliminary Response - Patent Owner Preliminary Response (P.T.A.B. Jan. 29, 2016)

cite Cite Document
Analyze

4 Power of Attorney: Power of Attorney

Document IPR2016-00117, No. 4 Power of Attorney - Power of Attorney (P.T.A.B. Nov. 20, 2015)

cite Cite Document
Analyze
1 2 3 >>