Defendant
1 case as defendant.
I'll research this entity before writing.
This is an important finding — the "Squires" entity appears to be a government official, not a company. Let me confirm.
Company overview. "Squires (USPTO)" is not a company. It denotes John A. Squires, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, named in his official capacity as appellee/intervenor. Squires was confirmed by the Senate on Sept. 17, 2025 and heads the USPTO, which by his agency's own description is a roughly $5 billion federal operation with over 13,500 employees (USPTO/Commerce.gov). He was previously an IP partner at Dilworth Paxson LLP and chief IP counsel at Goldman Sachs (2000–2009). Ownership status: a U.S. federal agency — not public, private, or a subsidiary.
Products / services. The USPTO examines and grants patents and trademarks, administers the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), and advises the Administration on IP policy. The Director is the statutory decisionmaker for IPR/PGR institution and for discretionary-denial policy. There are no commercial product lines; this is a government regulator, not an operating company or a patent-assertion entity.
Litigation posture. The single tracked Federal Circuit case reflects the Director's statutory role, not commercial litigation. When a private IPR petitioner settles or withdraws on appeal, the Director may intervene under 35 U.S.C. § 143 to defend the Board's decision. The "defendant" count is an artifact of that role; the Director is named as appellee/intervenor in many such appeals (e.g., Amsted Rail Co. v. Squires; Cases2Tech, LLC v. Squires; Manufacturing Resources Int'l v. Squires; Ethanol Boosting Systems v. Squires). The venue signal is appellate-only — no district-court filings are tracked.
Notable case. ST Case1Tech, LLC v. Squires, No. 23-2294 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 9, 2025). ST Case1Tech (formerly Staton Techiya, LLC) — an audio-technology patent holder that had sued Samsung over Galaxy earbuds — appealed PTAB obviousness findings in Samsung-filed IPRs. Samsung settled and withdrew, and the Director intervened. The court affirmed invalidation of claims in U.S. Patents 8,111,839 and 9,124,982 (always-on recording), with companion affirmances (Nos. 23-2305/-2306, -2335, -2387, -2388) covering the '542, '244, and '424 earpiece patents.
Appeal by ST Case1Tech, LLC (substituted for Staton Techiya, LLC) from the PTAB Final Written Decision in IPR2022-00234 involving US 9,124,982 claims 17-20. The Federal Circuit affirmed on October 9, 2025 in a nonprecedential decision.