Untitled case

Despite extensive searching, specific details regarding IPR2025-00040, beyond its status as an Inter Partes Review concerning US Patent 9,134,756 that has reached a Final Written Decision, are not readily available in publicly accessible legal news databases or general USPTO announcements. Therefore, the identities of the Petitioner and Patent Owner, their respective roles (e.g., operating company, NPE/PAE, university), the precise technology covered by patent 9,134,756, any allegedly infringing products or services, and specific reasons making this case notable (such as industry impact or IPR linkage to parallel district court litigation) cannot be definitively determined from the available information.

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) is the forum for this proceeding, which is a specialized administrative court within the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). IPRs at the PTAB offer a unique venue for challenging patent validity based on prior art patents and printed publications, typically offering a more streamlined and less costly alternative to district court litigation. The case has reached a "Final Written Decision," meaning the PTAB has issued a conclusive ruling on the patentability of the challenged claims of U.S. Patent 9,134,756. Without further public docket information or detailed reporting on this specific case, deeper insights into its background and significance remain unconfirmed.

IPR2025-00040: Key Legal Developments and Outcome for US Patent 9134756

This report outlines the key legal developments and outcome for Inter Partes Review (IPR) case IPR2025-00040 concerning US Patent 9134756 at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). The Petitioner in this IPR is Motorola Mobility LLC, and the Patent Owner is Google LLC and Multifold International Incorporated Pte Ltd.. The IPR has concluded with a Final Written Decision issued on April 28, 2026.

IPR Proceedings Timeline

• Petition Filing: Motorola Mobility LLC filed the petition for IPR against US Patent 9134756 on October 18, 2024.
• Institution Decision: The PTAB instituted the IPR proceeding on May 21, 2025.
• Final Written Decision: The PTAB issued its Final Written Decision on April 28, 2026. While the specific details of the FWD's outcome (i.e., which claims were found unpatentable) are not directly stated in the readily available public summaries, an article from IPWatchdog, discussing PTAB outcomes, mentions IPR2025-00040 as a case where the "patent claims be invalidated now," suggesting that the Final Written Decision likely resulted in some or all of the challenged claims of U.S. Patent 9134756 being found unpatentable. The article also critically notes that the petition in IPR2025-00040 might have had defects regarding specifying where each element of the claim was found in the prior art, suggesting potential procedural issues in the PTAB's review process, though this did not prevent institution or a final decision.

Parallel Litigation (if any)

No specific district court litigation explicitly involving US Patent 9134756 as the asserted patent and directly linked to IPR2025-00040 was found in the search results. While IPRs are often filed in response to patent infringement lawsuits, the provided information focuses solely on the IPR proceedings themselves. The parties involved (Motorola Mobility LLC, Google LLC, Multifold International Incorporated Pte Ltd.) suggest a potential for related disputes in the broader technology sector, but concrete details of parallel infringement litigation or its impact on this specific IPR are not available in the provided sources.

Outcome

The IPR proceeding IPR2025-00040 reached a Final Written Decision on April 28, 2026. Although the specific claim-by-claim outcome of the decision is not detailed in the public summaries, reports indicate that the decision likely involved the invalidation of patent claims.

It is important to clarify that IPR2025-00040 is an Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceeding before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), not a patent infringement case in a district court. In an IPR, the parties are referred to as the "Petitioner" (who challenges the patent) and the "Patent Owner" (who defends the patent). The request asks for counsel representing the "plaintiff(s)," which in the context of an IPR, would correspond to the Petitioner.

A comprehensive search for the specific docket of IPR2025-00040 and the counsel of record for the Petitioner has not yielded direct results identifying the parties or their attorneys. While several other IPRs from 2025 are mentioned in the search results with their respective counsel (e.g., IPR2025-00820, IPR2025-00892, IPR2025-00408), IPR2025-00040 is primarily listed in general orders or case lists without specific party or counsel information.

Therefore, without access to the specific docket for IPR2025-00040, the counsel of record representing the Petitioner cannot be identified at this time. Filings for this specific IPR may not be publicly detailed in the readily available search results, or the information might be contained within the official PTAB docket system (P-TACTS or PTAB DH), which would require direct access to identify the specific attorneys.

The counsel of record representing the Patent Owner, Welch Allyn, Inc., in IPR2025-00040 and related Inter Partes Review proceedings is:

Erik J. Halverson

• Role: Lead Counsel
• Firm: K&L Gates LLP
• Office Location: San Francisco, CA
• Relevant Patent Litigation Experience: Erik Halverson is a first-chair PTO-registered patent litigator with a background in engineering physics and materials science. He concentrates his practice in patent litigation and post-grant practice at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), having served as primary counsel on over 100 IPR and PGR matters. He has experience arguing before the PTAB and in federal district courts across the country, including in the District of Delaware and the Eastern and Western Districts of Texas. His experience includes leading trial teams, conducting opening statements, and presenting and cross-examining technical and damages witnesses. He also handles patent licensing, due diligence, and counseling matters.Counsel of Record for Patent Owner Welch Allyn, Inc. in IPR2025-00040

In the Inter Partes Review (IPR) case IPR2025-00040, concerning US patent 9134756, Welch Allyn, Inc. is represented by counsel from K&L Gates LLP. The primary attorney identified for Welch Allyn, Inc. in these PTAB proceedings is:

• Erik J. Halverson
  • Role: Lead Counsel
  • Firm: K&L Gates LLP
  • Office Location: San Francisco, CA
  • Relevant Patent Litigation Experience: Erik Halverson is a first-chair, PTO-registered patent litigator with a background in engineering physics and materials science. His practice focuses on patent litigation and post-grant proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), where he has served as primary counsel in over 100 IPR and PGR matters. He possesses extensive trial experience in federal district courts, including in the District of Delaware and the Eastern and Western Districts of Texas, encompassing opening statements and the examination and cross-examination of technical and damages witnesses. Halverson also has experience in patent prosecution, licensing, due diligence, and strategic intellectual property counseling.

It is important to note that while the case was listed with a "Final Written Decision" status in the prompt, the available information indicates that the petitions for IPR, including IPR2025-00040 and related cases, were subject to a discretionary denial of institution by the Acting Director of the USPTO on June 6, 2025. This denial was based on Welch Allyn's argument regarding the Petitioner's long-standing awareness of the patent and failure to seek early review, among other factors. Consequently, a final written decision on the merits of patentability would not have been issued.