Plaintiff
229 cases as plaintiff.
Unified Patents, LLC is a private, membership-based organization founded in 2012 that works to deter patent assertions from non-practicing entities (NPEs), often called "patent trolls." Headquartered in the Washington, D.C. area, the company is backed by private equity firm WestView Capital Partners, which made a growth investment in 2019. While some sources state a San Jose, California headquarters, recent information points to the D.C. area. Employee counts vary by source, with estimates ranging from 36 to under 100.
The company’s primary service is providing patent risk mitigation for its members, which include over 350 companies ranging from startups to large technology corporations like Google and NetApp. Unified Patents monitors NPE activity and challenges the validity of patents being asserted by NPEs in specific technology areas, or "Zones," such as cloud storage, content delivery, and blockchain. It achieves this mainly by filing inter partes reviews (IPRs) and other post-grant proceedings at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) to invalidate patents it deems to be of poor quality. The company states that it never pays NPEs to purchase or license patents, in order to avoid incentivizing further NPE activity.
Unified Patents' litigation posture is unique. It acts as a defensive patent aggregator, but its methods place it in the role of plaintiff or petitioner. The provided case data, showing one plaintiff case at the PTAB and zero defendant cases, is characteristic of its business model. Unified proactively challenges patents asserted by other entities against its members. This activity is exclusively at the PTAB, an administrative venue for challenging patent validity, rather than in district court infringement litigation.
The company's strategy is to deter litigation by invalidating the patents that form the basis of NPE lawsuits. The tracked case, Unified Patents v. Cortex MCP Inc., is an example of its core business, where it initiates a proceeding at the PTAB to challenge a patent's validity. This model has sometimes led to disputes over whether Unified's members, such as Apple and Samsung in one notable case, should be identified as the real parties-in-interest in its PTAB petitions.
Watchlist
Email-only, free, anonymous. We'll notify you when Unified Patents files another patent-infringement lawsuit. One-click unsubscribe from any alert.
Post-Grant Review initiated by Unified Patents against Biomarin Pharmaceutical Inc. regarding the patentability of US Patent 12233106. Institution of the review has been granted, meaning the PTAB will proceed with a review of challenged claims.
Unified Patents filed this Inter Partes Review petition against AutoConnect Holdings LLC regarding patent 9147296, which was not instituted due to procedural reasons.
This is an Inter Partes Review petition filed with the PTAB concerning US patent 8477762, initiated by Unified Patents against Dynamic Mesh Networks Inc., which was ultimately not instituted.
Unified Patents filed an inter partes review (IPR) petition challenging US patent 12013326, which was denied institution by the PTAB on May 6, 2026.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review petition against Qomplx Inc. concerning US patent 12218934, which is currently pending before the PTAB.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) petition against Treace Medical Concepts Inc. at the PTAB concerning US patent 12102368.
This Inter Partes Review (IPR) was filed by Unified Patents against Inari Medical Inc before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Unified Patents, as the petitioner, initiated an Inter Partes Review (IPR) against Marlin Semiconductor Ltd, the patent owner, concerning US patent 7888195.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) case filed by Unified Patents challenging the validity of US patent 11875275 before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The patent owner is likely Cisco Technology Inc. or Splunk LLC.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) filed by Unified Patents against Thales DIS France SAS, challenging US patent 11387982 before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
An Inter Partes Review petition filed by Unified Patents against Nielsen Co US LLC, the current assignee of US patent 12063402, before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
This case is an Inter Partes Review (IPR) petition filed by Unified Patents against Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. regarding US patent 7577417, which has been instituted by the PTAB.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review petition challenging US patent 11671702, which was not instituted by the PTAB for procedural reasons.
An IPR filed by Unified Patents against SK Hynix, Inc. at the PTAB, which was not instituted due to procedural reasons.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) filed by Unified Patents challenging US patent 10735320, with K Mizra LLC as the patent owner, which is currently pending and has been instituted.
Unified Patents filed PTAB case IPR2025-01441 on August 22, 2025, challenging US patent 7706641. The PTAB subsequently decided not to institute the inter partes review on its merits.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) against Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited concerning US Patent 9337193, which was not instituted on the merits.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) case filed by Unified Patents against Voith Patent GmbH before the PTAB, challenging US patent 9982388.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) against Monahan Products and ANDBABY GENERATION, challenging US Patent 9403550. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) subsequently declined to institute the review for procedural reasons.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) against Ascentcare Dental Products, Inc. challenging patent 11744686, which was not instituted due to procedural reasons.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review petition challenging US Patent 9804819, asserted against Soundclear Technologies LLC, which was not instituted.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) initiated by Unified Patents as petitioner against Paneltouch Technologies LLC (patent owner) concerning US patent 8803836, which concluded in a settlement.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceeding filed by Unified Patents against Evolution Malta Ltd, the assignee of US Patent 10629024, before the PTAB. The IPR was instituted and is currently pending.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review challenging patent 8085192 owned by Longhorn Automotive Group LLC. The PTAB did not institute the review.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) petition against Samsung Display Co., Ltd. regarding US patent 11574990, which is currently pending settlement and institution.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) petition challenging US patent 11936693 before the PTAB. This IPR, case number IPR2025-01085, was filed on March 5, 2025, and later settled.
Unified Patents requested ex parte reexamination of US Patent 7987002, and the USPTO's Central Reexamination Unit granted the request, finding substantial new questions of patentability.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) was filed by Unified Patents challenging US patent 11572879, with Miracor Medical SA as the patent owner and Abbott Laboratories and Thoratec LLC identified as opponents. The case is currently pending and has been instituted.
Unified Patents filed an inter partes review petition against Soundclear Technologies LLC at the PTAB concerning patent 9070374, which was procedurally not instituted.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review petition against Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc. challenging the validity of US patent 10911186. The petition has been instituted.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) was filed by Unified Patents against Baby Jogger II LLC concerning US patent 8955869. The PTAB did not institute a full review of the patent's validity, likely due to a procedural issue.
This Inter Partes Review petition was filed by Unified Patents against Advanced Coding Technologies LLC at the PTAB and was not instituted due to procedural reasons.
A post-grant review (PGR) proceeding filed by Unified Patents against Inflexion Point Technologies LLC concerning patent 12102027, which was not instituted on the merits.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review petition against Secure Communication Technologies LLC concerning patent 11687971, which was not instituted on the merits.
An Inter Partes Review petition was filed against US Patent 9900249 by Unified Patents, but the petition was not instituted due to procedural reasons.
Unified Patents filed a Post-Grant Review petition against Xifi Networks R&D Inc concerning patent 12250564, which the PTAB has instituted and is currently pending.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review against Advanced Integrated Circuit Process LLC concerning patent 7439623, which was procedurally not instituted.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review petition against Aon Re, Inc. at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board concerning patent 10529029, which was not instituted due to procedural reasons.
An inter partes review (IPR) petition was filed by Unified Patents challenging US Patent 9666732, likely against First Solar Inc. The petition was filed in 2025 but was not instituted due to procedural reasons.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) petition was filed by Unified Patents against Samsung Display Co., Ltd. regarding US Patent 10720483, which subsequently reached a settlement.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) petition filed by Unified Patents against Snapaid Ltd regarding US Patent 11252325 was denied institution by the PTAB on January 9, 2026.
Unified Patents, as petitioner, filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceeding against patent owner Massively Broadband LLC regarding patent 11063625. The proceeding was not instituted on procedural grounds.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review petition against Paygeo LLC concerning patent 12014347, which was not instituted due to procedural reasons.
This is an Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceeding initiated by Unified Patents against Cleveland Medical Devices Inc regarding US patent 11786680. The case is currently pending and has been instituted.
An inter partes review (IPR) was initiated by Unified Patents against Tecan Genomics Inc. concerning US patent 10036012. This case has reached a final written decision.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) initiated by Unified Patents against Pantech Corp, the current assignee of US10863573, at the PTAB. The IPR is currently pending and has been instituted.
Unified Patents filed an ex parte reexamination proceeding against US Patent RE47720 at the USPTO.
This is an inter partes review (IPR) petition, IPR2025-01044, filed by Unified Patents against Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc. at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board on July 26, 2024, concerning patent 11516879. The petition has been instituted and is pending.
Unified Patents, as Petitioner, filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) against Optronic Sciences LLC, the patent owner, regarding US patent 7226801, which subsequently reached a settlement.
A Post-Grant Review (PGR) proceeding before the PTAB challenging patent 12142371, which was not instituted on the merits.
Unified Patents initiated a reexamination proceeding against Competitive Access Systems regarding US Patent 10,868,908. The CRU issued a final rejection of all challenged claims.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) filed by Unified Patents challenging US Patent 9991030, owned by Belden Inc., which has reached a Final Written Decision.
An inter partes review was filed by Unified Patents against Nobots LLC, the current assignee of US 9595008, which resulted in a Final Written Decision.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) petition challenging US Patent 8093830 owned by Bishop Display Tech LLC, which subsequently ended in a settlement.
An inter partes review (IPR) initiated by Unified Patents against Intellectual Ventures II LLC before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board concerning US Patent 7882320, which was ultimately not instituted on the merits.
An inter partes review initiated by Unified Patents against Nike Inc., as the patent owner, concerning US patent 9078488, which concluded in a settlement.
An Inter Partes Review filed by petitioner Unified Patents against patent owner Cortex MCP Inc. before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). A Final Written Decision has been issued.
An inter partes review (IPR) filed by Unified Patents challenging the validity of patent 8,224,794. The PTAB did not institute the IPR on procedural grounds.
An inter partes review petition filed by Unified Patents concerning US patent 10735488 was not instituted on procedural grounds.
An inter partes review (IPR) was filed by Unified Patents against the patent owner, Corning Inc., which was not instituted due to procedural reasons.
An inter partes review (IPR) proceeding initiated by Unified Patents against Divx LLC, the patent owner, which resulted in a procedural termination.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) case concerning patent 11116035, filed by Unified Patents against the patent owner Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review petition against Distefano Website Innovations, LLC challenging at least claim 1 of patent 11763316, which has been instituted and is currently pending before the PTAB.
Unified Patents filed an inter partes review petition against CM HK Limited regarding US patent 11698687. The PTAB has instituted the review, with a projected final written decision due by August 12, 2026.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) initiated by Unified Patents at the PTAB concerning US patent 11011014.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) was initiated by Unified Patents against patent owner Lumiradx UK Ltd. concerning patent 8630699, which concluded with a procedural termination.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) was initiated by Unified Patents against Comet Ml Inc regarding US patent 11650968, which concluded in a settlement.
Unified Patents filed a Post-Grant Review (PGR) at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) against Halozyme Inc. challenging US patent 12195773. The case, PGR2025-00053, is currently pending and has been instituted.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review against Baby Jogger II LLC at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) concerning patent 11505231, which was ultimately not instituted for procedural reasons.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) against Advanced Integrated Circuit Process LLC concerning US patent 8587076. The PTAB did not institute the review due to procedural reasons.
An Inter Partes Review petition filed by Unified Patents against Advanced Integrated Circuit Process LLC concerning US patent 8253180 at the PTAB, which was not instituted due to procedural reasons.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review petition against US patent 12011329 at the PTAB, but the petition was not instituted on the merits.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) petition filed by Unified Patents against Corning Inc. concerning patent 8627684 was not instituted due to procedural reasons.
An inter partes review (IPR) case was filed by Unified Patents concerning US patent 10937880, which subsequently reached a settlement.
An inter partes review petition filed by Unified Patents challenging US Patent 11878729, with Baby Jogger II LLC as the patent owner. The petition was not instituted for procedural reasons.
An Inter Partes Review challenging US Patent 10218995 was filed by Unified Patents at the PTAB, but was not instituted.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceeding filed by Unified Patents against LG Electronics Inc. concerning US patent 10306667, which was not instituted on procedural grounds.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review petition against LS Cable & Systems Ltd. concerning US patent 8013568, but the PTAB decided not to institute a full review based on the merits of the petition.
A Post Grant Review (PGR) petition filed by Unified Patents challenging US patent 12095149, which the PTAB did not institute on the merits.
A Post-Grant Review (PGR) proceeding initiated by Unified Patents, as the petitioner, against Solmetex LLC, the patent owner, concerning US patent 121679948. The PTAB decided not to proceed with the review for procedural reasons.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review against patent owner CardWare Inc. regarding patent 11328286. The PTAB case was not instituted due to procedural reasons.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) against Neurent Medical Ltd challenging US patent 12089889, but the petition was not instituted on procedural grounds.
Unified Patents initiated an Inter Partes Review (IPR) at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) challenging US patent 12087871, which was ultimately not instituted.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) case filed by Unified Patents against CTEXT IP LLC at the PTAB, which was not instituted due to procedural reasons.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) against patent 11014301 at the PTAB, which has been instituted and is currently pending.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review petition against Marlin Semiconductor Ltd. regarding US Patent 8993384, which has been instituted by the PTAB.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) against patent 9271536, filed by Unified Patents, was not instituted by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board due to procedural reasons.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) against Brainguard Technologies Inc. concerning patent 9414635, which was ultimately not instituted on procedural grounds.
An inter partes review filed by Unified Patents against Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. concerning US patent 10828345, which was not instituted on the merits.
An inter partes review (IPR) case, IPR2025-01289, initiated by Unified Patents concerning patent 11681614, which has reached a settlement.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) petition against Leprino Foods Co before the PTAB, challenging the validity of US patent 11825860. The IPR has been instituted and is currently pending.
An IPR petition concerning US patent 11277650, filed by Unified Patents, is currently pending and instituted before the PTAB.
Unified Patents filed an inter partes review petition (IPR2025-01327) challenging US patent 9727655, which has been instituted by the PTAB.
Unified Patents challenged patent 11892897 in an Inter Partes Review before the PTAB, but the petition was not instituted on procedural grounds.
This is a PTAB case initiated by Unified Patents, as the petitioner, against Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, concerning the validity of US patent 10947589. The case was not instituted on its merits.
An inter partes review (IPR) was filed by Unified Patents challenging US patent 11057896, with the case later reaching a settlement.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) petition against Telcom Ventures LLC at the PTAB concerning patent 11924743. The petition was not instituted due to procedural reasons.
Unified Patents, as Petitioner, filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR2025-01377) against Radian Memory Systems LLC, the Patent Owner of US11347656. The case subsequently settled.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) case, initiated by Unified Patents, was filed before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and subsequently reached a settlement.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceeding initiated by Unified Patents involving US patent 8620659, which concluded in a settlement.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) initiated by Unified Patents challenging US patent 6888181, owned by Marlin Semiconductor Ltd. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued a judgment granting adverse judgment against the patent owner on May 13, 2026, concluding the case.
An inter partes review proceeding initiated by Unified Patents against Credo Technology Group Ltd. before the PTAB, which is currently pending and has been instituted.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review petition against Dynamic Mesh Networks Inc. challenging US patent 11368537, which has been instituted.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review against Ginko LLC, the assignee of patent 11025573. The review was subsequently not instituted on the merits.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review against Maxell Ltd. at the PTAB concerning patent 8180198, which is currently in a pending and instituted status.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) petition challenging patent 10140028 owned by Mosaid Technologies Inc., which was not instituted by the PTAB due to procedural reasons.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) petition, IPR2025-01430, was filed by Unified Patents against Messageloud Inc. at the PTAB, concerning US patent 11316964, and concluded with a procedural termination.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) initiated by Unified Patents against Messageloud Inc. concerning US patent 10110725, which concluded with a procedural termination.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review against Advanced Memory Technologies LLC concerning US patent 7777557 at the PTAB, but the petition was not instituted.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review petition challenging US patent 11009162, which was not instituted procedurally by the PTAB due to the USPTO's 'settled expectations' factor.
Unified Patents, through 'Unified Patents PTAB Data', filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) against Samsung Display Co Ltd regarding US patent 11500496, which subsequently resulted in a settlement.
Unified Patents filed an inter partes review (IPR) against CardWare Inc. and Virtual Electric Inc. concerning US patent 11176538, which later reached a settlement.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) initiated by Unified Patents as the petitioner against Maxell Ltd as the patent owner for US patent 11812091, which is currently pending and instituted at the PTAB.
An IPR filed by Unified Patents against the patent owner, Snapaid Ltd., which was not instituted due to procedural reasons.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) was filed by Unified Patents challenging US patent 9117909, naming Marlin Semiconductor Ltd. as the patent owner. The PTAB did not institute the review on procedural grounds.
An inter partes review (IPR) filed by Unified Patents against Myport Technologies Inc. and Myport IP Inc. at the PTAB, which was not instituted due to procedural reasons.
An inter partes review (IPR) petition, IPR2025-01260, was filed by Unified Patents challenging patent 8934922. The petition was not instituted due to procedural reasons.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) against Avant Location Technologies LLC concerning US patent 8738040. The IPR was not instituted due to procedural reasons.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) challenge filed by Unified Patents against Avant Location Technologies LLC regarding US Patent 9119030. The IPR was ultimately not instituted on procedural grounds.
Unified Patents, as petitioner, initiated an inter partes review (IPR) against patent owner MYPORT TECHNOLOGIES Inc. concerning US Patent 10237067, which ultimately reached a settlement.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceeding initiated by Unified Patents against AutoConnect Holdings LLC regarding patent 9123186, which is currently pending and has been instituted.
This is an Inter Partes Review (IPR) initiated by Unified Patents against Sharkninja Operating LLC, concerning US patent 11672377. The case is currently pending and has been instituted.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) was filed by Unified Patents concerning patent 11389026, and the review has been instituted by the PTAB.
This inter partes review was filed by Unified Patents against Ipsen Biopharm Ltd. and subsequently instituted by the PTAB.
An Inter Partes Review initiated by Unified Patents challenging US Patent 10,574,721, which was procedurally not instituted by the PTAB.
This is an inter partes review (IPR) case challenging US patent 9005293, initiated by Unified Patents against the current assignees, Moskowtiz Nathan C and Moskowitz Family LLC, and is currently pending and instituted at the PTAB.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) was filed by Unified Patents concerning patent 11087307 but was not instituted due to procedural reasons.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) against Headwater Research LLC, the patent owner, challenging US patent 10064055. The case before the PTAB reached a procedural termination.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review petition against US7593936, owned by Netskope, Inc., at the PTAB. The petition was not instituted on procedural grounds, potentially due to the patent's expiration on March 4, 2026.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) against patent 8327426 with the PTAB, but the petition was not instituted on procedural grounds.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) petition was filed by Unified Patents against patent 8635697, which was subsequently not instituted due to procedural reasons.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) was filed by Unified Patents against Malikie Innovations Ltd concerning patent 8545247 at the PTAB, which concluded in a settlement.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) against Malikie Innovations Ltd. at the PTAB concerning patent 7529305, which subsequently settled.
Unified Patents filed an IPR petition challenging US patent 8356336, which was not instituted by the PTAB.
Unified Patents filed a Post-Grant Review (PGR) petition against Olaplex Inc., the current assignee of US12214225, at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, but the petition was not instituted on the merits.
Unified Patents initiated an inter partes review against Liftra IP ApS concerning US patent 12104578 at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review petition against Adeia Media Holdings Inc., the current assignee of US patent 8542705, which resulted in a procedural termination.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) was filed by Unified Patents against Sitnet LLC before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board concerning US patent 10117290.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceeding challenging the validity of US patent 11973864 at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review petition against Secure Communication Technologies LLC at the PTAB, challenging US patent 11995685.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) petition was filed by Unified Patents against Sitnet LLC concerning US patent 12120769. The case is currently listed as pending with a notice of refund approved.
Unified Patents filed a patent infringement case in the New York Southern District Court asserting US patent 12120769. Litigation is ongoing.
A Post Grant Review (PGR) case filed by Unified Patents against Leonhard Kurz Stiftung and Co KG concerning patent 12220935, which was not instituted on the merits by the PTAB.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) petition, IPR2026-00097, against Kurin, Inc. challenging US patent 12138052. The PTAB Director denied institution of the petition on procedural grounds on May 14, 2026.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) challenging the validity of US Patent 9318609, which is currently pending before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Unified Patents initiated an Inter Partes Review (IPR) against Pictiva Displays International Ltd, challenging the validity of US patent 12158250.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceeding concerning US patent 12316706, initiated by Unified Patents against Smart Speaker LLC. The PTAB issued a decision to institute the IPR on May 6, 2026.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) petition, IPR2026-00143, against US patent 12001599 at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, which is currently pending.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) case filed by Unified Patents against WOODSTREAM CORPORATION before the PTAB, which was not instituted due to procedural reasons.
Unified Patents initiated an Inter Partes Review (IPR) against the patent owner, Ingeniospec LLC, before the PTAB, but the petition was not instituted.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review petition against Smart Speaker LLC, the current assignee of US11190590, before the PTAB. The IPR, identified as IPR2026-00148, is currently pending.
An inter partes review (IPR) initiated by Unified Patents involving US patent 10966025.
An inter partes review (IPR) was filed by Unified Patents against JLI National Settlement Trust regarding US patent 12156533, which was procedurally not instituted.
This is an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding filed by Unified Patents against Genzyme Corp, the current assignee of US patent 11698377, before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). The case is currently pending.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceeding filed by Unified Patents against Genzyme Corp concerning US patent 12123880.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) against US patent 12011367 with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
This is a PTAB case where Unified Patents challenged US patent 10274325, currently assigned to Brain Corp, which resulted in a procedural non-institution.
Unified Patents initiated an inter partes review (IPR) against AutoConnect Holdings LLC regarding US patent 9173100, which was ultimately not instituted on procedural grounds.
An IPR filed by Unified Patents against Inari Medical Inc before the PTAB, challenging US patent 12156669.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) against patent owner Sandpiper Cdn LLC concerning US patent 9762692, which is currently pending before the PTAB.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) against Inspire Medical Systems Inc concerning US patent 11806526 before the PTAB, which is currently pending.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) initiated by Unified Patents challenging US patent 11850424, currently pending before the PTAB.
This is a Post-Grant Review (PGR) case filed by Unified Patents against Treace Medical Concepts Inc. before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) concerning US patent 12268428. The case is currently pending.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceeding initiated by Unified Patents concerning US patent 9456053, which is currently pending before the PTAB.
Unified Patents filed an inter partes review (IPR) petition against US Patent 10,991,097, which is currently pending before the PTAB.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) was filed by Unified Patents against InterDigital VC Holdings Inc before the PTAB, challenging US patent 12143606. The case, IPR2026-00192, is currently pending and was filed in 2026.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review petition against Golden Eye Technologies LLC concerning patent 10051556 before the PTAB.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review petition against InterDigital VC Holdings Inc before the PTAB challenging US patent 11936876.
An IPR challenging US patent 8116749 was initiated by Unified Patents at the PTAB but was not instituted on the merits.
An inter partes review (IPR) filed by Unified Patents against Damaka Inc, the current assignee of patent 11576046, before the PTAB, which is currently pending.
This is an Inter Partes Review (IPR) case filed by Unified Patents at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) concerning US patent 9578092, with a filing year implied as 2026 and currently pending.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) case filed by Unified Patents, challenging US patent 9027032 owned by Damaka Inc. The case is currently pending at the PTAB.
This is a PTAB inter partes review (IPR) case filed by Unified Patents, challenging US patent 11539663.
An inter partes review (IPR) initiated by Unified Patents against Six Trees Capital LLC, the owner of US patent 11315090, currently pending before the PTAB.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) case initiated by Unified Patents challenging the validity of US patent 8076735, currently pending before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).
Unified Patents filed this inter partes review (IPR) against Bulletproof Property Management LLC, the current assignee of US Patent 12221104, challenging the patent's validity.
Unified Patents initiated an Inter Partes Review (IPR) against Web3ai Technologies LLC concerning US patent 9218574, which is currently pending before the PTAB.
An inter partes review petition filed by Unified Patents challenging US patent 11058757.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceeding filed by Unified Patents against Zodiac Pool Systems LLC concerning US patent 11003191.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review petition with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board concerning US Patent 10549648.
Unified Patents filed a Post-Grant Review (PGR) petition challenging US Patent 12293691, with Tianma Microelectronics Co Ltd implied as the patent owner. The case is currently pending.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) filed by Unified Patents against InterDigital Madison Patent Holdings SAS challenging the validity of US patent 9185268.
This is a Post-Grant Review (PGR) case filed by Unified Patents against Surrozen Operating Inc before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, currently pending.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) petition, IPR2026-00244, against patent 10180952 before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The case names Search And Share Technologies LLC as the typical respondent. It is currently pending.
An inter partes review proceeding initiated by Unified Patents against Trumpf Laser und Systemtechnik GmbH regarding the validity of US patent 12240054.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review petition against Moskowitz Family LLC concerning US patent 10603183, which is currently pending before the PTAB.
An inter partes review (IPR) case filed at the PTAB concerning US patent 10200654, with Unified Patents identified as the petitioner.
Unified Patents filed a petition for an Inter Partes Review (IPR) against SoftView LLC at the PTAB concerning patent 10083154.
Unified Patents initiated an Inter Partes Review (IPR) against TOUTVIRTUAL Inc, the original assignee of the patent, challenging the validity of US patent 11656915.
An inter partes review petition filed by Unified Patents against TOUTVIRTUAL Inc. before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board concerning patent 12079667.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review against TOUTVIRTUAL Inc challenging patent 10810050 before the PTAB.
Unified Patents filed an inter partes review (IPR) petition challenging the validity of US patent 7840427, currently assigned to Carma Technology Ltd.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) against US patent 10741071, which is currently pending before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).
Unified Patents initiated an Inter Partes Review against Carma Technology Ltd., the assignee of US Patent 11164456, at the PTAB. The case is currently pending.
An Inter Partes Review petition filed by Unified Patents against Carma Technology Ltd concerning US Patent 11017668.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) was filed by Unified Patents against patent 11036371 at the PTAB.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) case challenging US patent 10664141 was filed by Unified Patents at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and is currently pending.
Unified Patents filed an inter partes review petition against the patent owner, typically Qomplx Inc. or its assignees. The case, filed in 2026, is currently pending before the PTAB.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) against patent 11066656 at the PTAB.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceeding initiated by Unified Patents against Sanas Ai Inc. at the PTAB concerning patent 11948550.
A petition for inter partes review was filed by Unified Patents against US patent 7181743, but the Patent Trial and Appeal Board did not institute a trial on the merits.
Unified Patents, as petitioner, filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) challenging the validity of US patent 7412517 against the patent owner, Intellectual Ventures I LLC. The case concluded in a settlement.
An inter partes review (IPR) was filed against US patent 7940851 by Unified Patents, with Optis Wireless Technology LLC as the patent owner, and a final written decision having been issued by the PTAB.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) filed by Unified Patents against Intellectual Ventures II LLC (the patent owner) which was not instituted on the merits.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review against ImagineAR Inc. challenging US patent 11484797. The PTAB declined to institute the review on the merits.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) challenging US patent 11406402 was initiated by Unified Patents at the PTAB, which has issued a Final Written Decision.
Unified Patents filed an inter partes review (IPR) against Intellectual Ventures II LLC challenging US patent 8332844, which was not instituted on the merits.
An Inter Partes Review initiated by Unified Patents challenging US Patent 10230009, which concluded with a Final Written Decision.
A Post-Grant Review (PGR) case filed before the PTAB by Unified Patents against the patent owners Atossa Therapeutics Inc and Krisan Biotech Co Ltd, concerning US patent 12071391, which has resulted in a settlement.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceeding initiated by Unified Patents against Cleveland Medical Devices Inc. challenging the validity of US patent 11375921, which has been instituted and is currently pending before the PTAB.
This inter partes review (IPR) at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) was initiated by Unified Patents challenging US patent 11690512.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review against Zaxcom Inc regarding US patent 7711443, which has been instituted by the PTAB.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) case concerning US patent 11487138, filed by Unified Patents at the PTAB, which resulted in an adverse judgment.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review petition against Pegasus Wireless Innovation LLC, challenging the validity of US patent 10638463. The PTAB has instituted the review, and the case is currently pending.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) petition was filed against US patent 10672711 at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board by Unified Patents, naming Yangtze Memory Technologies Co Ltd as the patent owner. The case is currently pending and has been instituted.
Unified Patents initiated an inter partes review (IPR) against Multifold International Inc Pte Ltd concerning patent 8842080, which concluded with a Final Written Decision.
An inter partes review (IPR) case at the PTAB involving Unified Patents as petitioner and Barco NV as patent owner, for which a Final Written Decision has been filed.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) initiated by Unified Patents at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board challenging US patent 11403237, which has reached a Final Written Decision.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) was filed by Unified Patents against US patent 10762002 with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).
An Inter Partes Review was filed against US Patent 9226090 at the PTAB, resulting in a Final Written Decision.
Unified Patents filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) against Novarad Corp, the patent owner, challenging US patent 11004271, which resulted in a Final Written Decision.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) case, IPR2022-01376, initiated by Unified Patents at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, for which a Final Written Decision has been issued.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) was filed by Unified Patents against RFCyber Corp concerning US Patent 11018724 with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, and a Final Written Decision has been issued.
This inter partes review resulted in a Final Written Decision.
An IPR proceeding at the PTAB, case number IPR2021-01602, initiated by Unified Patents against Rideshare Displays Inc. concerning patent 10748417, which has reached a Final Written Decision.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) initiated by Unified Patents challenging the validity of US Patent 10169987, which concluded with a Final Written Decision by the PTAB.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) was filed by Unified Patents against patent owner CONSUMERON LLC regarding US patent 8244594, resulting in a Final Written Decision.
An inter partes review filed by Unified Patents against CONSUMERON LLC before the PTAB, which reached a Final Written Decision.