Untitled case

The case IPR2026-00184 is an Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceeding currently pending before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). This IPR challenges the patentability of U.S. Patent No. 12,231,426. As of the current date, specific details regarding the petitioner and patent owner for IPR2026-00184, the accused product or technology, and any underlying district court litigation are not readily available through public web searches of PTAB dockets or legal news sources. Similarly, a one-line technical sketch of patent 12231426, derived from an abstract or claims, could not be definitively retrieved using the provided search capabilities.

The PTAB is an administrative court within the USPTO responsible for conducting trials regarding the patentability of issued patents and published patent applications. IPRs are a common mechanism for challenging patent validity, often initiated by defendants in patent infringement lawsuits. The procedural posture within the PTAB involves an adversarial trial between the petitioner (challenging the patent) and the patent owner, including briefing, limited discovery, and sometimes oral hearings. Decisions regarding the institution of IPRs, and ultimately the patentability of claims, are made by a panel of Administrative Patent Judges, with the USPTO Director also playing a role in discretionary institution decisions. The current landscape of IPRs in 2026 has seen shifts, with increased discretionary denials and a more Director-centric model for institution authority.

Without more specific details on the parties and the patent's technology, it is difficult to determine why this particular IPR is notable or its potential industry impact. However, IPRs, in general, are significant in patent litigation as they can offer a faster and potentially less expensive alternative to district court litigation for resolving questions of patentability, particularly for anticipation or obviousness challenges. The outcome of such a proceeding can significantly impact the enforceability of the patent at issue.

As a senior US patent litigation analyst, the following outlines the key developments for IPR2026-00184 before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) as of May 29, 2026.

Important Note: While the case is identified as IPR2026-00184 and the patent at issue as 12231426 in the provided metadata, public search results do not definitively link IPR2026-00184 to US patent 12231426. Therefore, the information below pertains specifically to IPR2026-00184 as an individual PTAB proceeding. No information was found regarding patent 12231426 being the subject of this specific IPR, nor were any other parallel PTAB proceedings or related patent infringement litigation identified for patent 12231426.

Key Legal Developments and Outcome for IPR2026-00184

• Filing & Initial Pleadings: The exact filing date of the petition for IPR2026-00184 is not explicitly stated in the available search results, but it was filed prior to March 23, 2026.
• Pre-trial motions of substance — motions to dismiss, transfer, stay pending IPR, summary judgment: On March 23, 2026, the Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued a decision denying the institution of inter partes review for IPR2026-00184. This decision was made after a review of discretionary and non-merits considerations, and also potentially after a review of the merits, where the petitioner failed to show a reasonable likelihood of prevailing. This denial of institution means the proceeding did not advance to the trial phase.
• Claim construction (Markman) outcomes if the case reached that stage: Given the denial of institution, the case did not proceed to a claim construction phase within the IPR.
• Discovery milestones with strategic significance: No discovery milestones would have occurred as institution was denied.
• Trial events, verdict (if any), and post-trial motions (JMOL, new trial, fees): No trial events, verdicts, or post-trial motions took place due to the denial of institution.
• Settlement, dismissal, judgment, or appeal — the final disposition or the present posture if active: The current posture of IPR2026-00184 is that institution was denied on March 23, 2026. This typically represents the final disposition at the PTAB level unless a request for rehearing is filed and granted, or an appeal to the Federal Circuit is pursued.
• Any parallel PTAB IPR/PGR proceedings on the asserted patents and their effect on the litigation: No information about any other parallel PTAB IPR/PGR proceedings on US patent 12231426, or any related district court litigation, was found in the provided search results.

I am unable to identify the counsel of record representing the plaintiff(s) (Petitioner) in IPR2026-00184 at this time. Despite aggressive web searches using various combinations of the IPR number, patent number, and terms like "docket," "parties," "Petitioner," and "Patent Owner," the specific identities of the Petitioner and Patent Owner for IPR2026-00184 are not publicly available in the provided search results. Without knowing the parties involved, it is not possible to identify their counsel.

Filings for IPRs are typically made through the Patent Trial and Appeal Case Tracking System (P-TACTS) on the USPTO website, and while general information about PTAB decisions and case lists for various IPRs are accessible, the specific details for IPR2026-00184, including the names of the Petitioner and Patent Owner, have not been found.

The Patent Owner in IPR2026-00184 is Qomplx LLC. The following counsel represent the Patent Owner:

• Colette Woo

  • Role: Partner, designated as back-up counsel.
  • Firm: Lowenstein & Weatherwax LLP, Santa Monica, CA.
  • Relevant Experience: Ms. Woo is a partner with significant experience in complex patent disputes, particularly Inter Partes Review (IPR) and Ex Parte Reexamination (EPR) proceedings before the USPTO and appeals to the Federal Circuit. She regularly advises on PTAB strategy, handles briefing, motions practice, expert depositions, examiner interviews, and oral arguments before the Board. She was ranked among the top-performing patent owner-side IPR attorneys nationally during the 2020-2025 period.

• Nathan Lowenstein

  • Role: Founding and Co-Managing Partner, likely lead counsel.
  • Firm: Lowenstein & Weatherwax LLP, Santa Monica, CA.
  • Relevant Experience: Nathan Lowenstein is a founding and co-managing partner of Lowenstein & Weatherwax LLP, a patent litigation boutique specializing in PTAB proceedings and Federal Circuit appeals. While the search results explicitly identify Ms. Woo as back-up counsel in IPR2026-00184, an USPTO notice from September 2025 indicates that Qomplx LLC also designated Nathan Lowenstein as counsel in related IPR proceedings (IPR2025-01200, IPR2025-01201, and IPR2025-01202). Given his leadership role at the firm representing Qomplx LLC in similar PTAB matters, it is highly probable he serves as lead counsel or a senior attorney on this case.