Articles Tagged: Patent Strategy
Zoom Communications, Inc. has launched a new inter partes review at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, opening docket IPR2026-00424 on July 24, 2026. While the petition is newly filed and the full merits record is still developing, the case is already worth watching for companies and counsel focused on communications technology, software patents, and parallel district court/PTAB strategy.
At this stage, the key takeaway is straightforward: Zoom is asking the PTAB to reconsider the validity of an issued patent through the IPR process, a forum that remains one of the most important tools for accused infringers facing high-stakes patent assertions.
A new inter partes review, IPR2026-00401, was filed on July 22, 2026, at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board against Zhuhai CosMX Battery Co., Ltd., putting another battery-related patent dispute on the radar for companies operating in the energy storage and electronics supply chain. For patent professionals tracking PTAB activity in advanced manufacturing and battery technology, this case is one to watch closely.
At this early stage, the publicly available docket information identifies the proceeding by the patent owner’s name, Zhuhai CosMX Battery Co., Ltd., but the petition materials will be the key source for confirming the specific patent number, the challenged claims, the identity of the petitioner, and the precise invalidity theories asserted.
Foleon Inc. has launched a new inter partes review at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, filing IPR2026-00403 on July 16, 2026. The proceeding puts at issue a patent that appears tied to digital publishing, online content creation, or related software-driven presentation technology—an area where PTAB challenges often turn on how broadly the patent owner framed routine web-based functionality and whether the prior art already taught the claimed implementation.
At this early stage, the publicly available docket entry identifies the petitioner as Foleon Inc., but practitioners will want to monitor the record closely for the petition itself, which should spell out the specific patent being challenged, the named patent owner, and the exact claims targeted for review.
Google LLC has filed a new inter partes review petition at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, opening IPR2026-00421 on July 13, 2026.
A new inter partes review, IPR2026-00416, was filed on July 9, 2026 at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, naming McCormick Company, Inc. in the proceeding. For patent practitioners tracking food technology, consumer products, and brand-adjacent innovation disputes, this is the kind of PTAB filing worth watching from the outset.
At this early stage, the docket information publicly available from the case caption primarily identifies the proceeding by the patent owner name, McCormick Company, Inc.. As is typical in a newly filed IPR, the key issues will center on which McCormick patent is being challenged, who the petitioner is, and whether the petition presents prior art grounds strong enough to justify institution. Those details often shape not only the PTAB strategy, but also any parallel district court or licensing dynamics.
In general, an IPR petition asks the Board to review the validity of one or more patent claims based on prior art patents or printed publications, usually under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 or 103. Once the petition and supporting papers are fully available, practitioners will want to examine the asserted references, claim constructions, any expert declaration support, and whether the petitioner is pressing a narrow claim-focused attack or attempting a broader invalidation campaign.
This case may be especially relevant for in-house IP counsel and outside litigators because PTAB challenges involving established commercial players like McCormick can reveal a great deal about how competitors or accused infringers are approaching ingredient, formulation, packaging, processing, or related patent portfolios. Even before institution, the filing can signal market pressure points, identify art that may be reused against related family members, and preview arguments that could spill into co-pending litigation or post-grant strategy.
Patent owners will also want to watch for familiar procedural themes: discretionary denial issues, real-party-in-interest disputes, the sufficiency of motivation-to-combine arguments, and whether the petition relies on teachings that map cleanly onto the challenged claims.
Twitch Interactive, Inc. has filed a new inter partes review petition at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, opening IPR2026-00397 on June 29, 2026. As of the initial docket entry, the proceeding is identified under Twitch’s name, but practitioners will want to watch closely for the patent owner, challenged patent number, and petition details as the Board record develops. View full case on Docket Alarm.
Although the early case caption does not yet reveal the full set of underlying merits documents, an IPR filing by a platform like Twitch is immediately notable.
A new inter partes review filed at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board could be one to watch for companies operating at the intersection of life sciences, nutraceuticals, and consumer health. In IPR2026-00400, the proceeding is captioned Thorne Research, Inc. and was filed on June 22, 2026.
At this early stage, the PTAB docket signals that a patent challenge involving Thorne Research is underway, but practitioners should note that key details—including the specific patent claims at issue, the identity of the petitioner and patent owner as reflected in the styled papers, and the precise invalidity combinations asserted—may develop as the record fills out.
A new inter partes review, IPR2026-00376, was filed at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board on June 18, 2026, naming Luxottica of America Inc. in the proceeding. While the publicly available docket caption confirms the PTAB filing and the involvement of Luxottica, this is the kind of early-stage matter patent practitioners will want to watch closely as the petition, patent-at-issue, and asserted invalidity theories come into sharper focus.
At this stage, the key takeaway is that a petitioner has asked the PTAB to institute trial on one or more claims of a patent connected to Luxottica.
ResMed Corp. has been named in a new inter partes review, IPR2026-00341, filed on June 12, 2026, before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. While the newly filed docket entry identifies the proceeding by the company name, practitioners will want to watch closely as the petition develops and the challenged patent, claims at issue, and prior-art combinations come into sharper focus through the institution briefing.
At this stage, the publicly available case caption signals that a patent associated with ResMed’s portfolio is being challenged at the PTAB.
Tesla Inc. is the named petitioner in a newly filed inter partes review, IPR2026-00382, at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, adding another matter for practitioners tracking high-stakes validity disputes before the USPTO.
Another PTAB proceeding has been filed against ResMed, with IPR2026-00341 entering the Patent Trial and Appeal Board on June 12, 2026. The petition places one of ResMed’s patents under inter partes review, opening a new front in what could become an important dispute for companies operating in the sleep-disorder and respiratory-device space.
At this stage, the publicly available docket identifies the proceeding by the title Resmed Corp., but practitioners will want to monitor the case record closely as the petition, mandatory notices, and related filings further clarify the specific patent claims at issue, the identity of all real parties in interest, and any parallel district court or ITC litigation that may shape the Board’s discretionary-review analysis.
As with any newly filed IPR, the key issues will center on which patent is being challenged, which claims are targeted, and what prior-art grounds are asserted. Typically, petitioners rely on anticipation and obviousness grounds under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103, supported by combinations of patents, printed publications, and expert declarations.
A new inter partes review proceeding at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board could draw close attention from patent owners, challengers, and counsel following the medical technology sector. In IPR2026-00341, filed June 12, 2026, the petition is styled Resmed Corp., signaling that ResMed is involved in a fresh PTAB dispute over the validity of an issued patent.
At this early stage, the public docket identifies the proceeding but may not yet fully reflect all underlying petition details, including the specific patent number, all real parties in interest, and the complete list of asserted prior-art grounds.
A new inter partes review, IPR2026-00391, was filed on June 5, 2026, at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board naming Teladoc Health, Inc. in the proceeding. The filing places another spotlight on the digital health and telemedicine patent landscape, where platform functionality, remote care workflows, and software-driven healthcare delivery continue to generate high-stakes validity disputes.
At this early stage, the PTAB docket identifies the proceeding by title but may not yet reflect the full set of publicly available petition details practitioners typically watch for, including the specific patent number, the complete alignment of petitioner and patent owner, and the precise prior-art combinations asserted in the challenge.
A new inter partes review, IPR2026-00387, was filed at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board on June 5, 2026, under the caption Optiver US LLC. At this early stage, the proceeding is notable less for a developed merits record and more for what it signals: another PTAB dispute involving a sophisticated market participant, with the potential to touch on commercially important technology and high-stakes parallel enforcement or licensing issues.
Based on the docket currently available, the proceeding names Optiver US LLC as the petitioner.
Vivint LLC has filed a new petition for inter partes review at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board in IPR2026-00375, opened on June 1, 2026.


Stay Connected