Zesty.AI, Inc. v. Aon Re, Inc.

Zesty.AI, Inc., an operating company specializing in AI-powered risk assessment solutions for the property insurance sector, filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) petition challenging U.S. Patent 11,030,491, owned by Aon Re, Inc.. Aon Re, Inc. is a globally renowned professional services firm that provides a wide range of risk, reinsurance, retirement, and health solutions, leveraging data and analytics to offer insights and advisory services to its clients.

The challenged patent, U.S. Patent 11,030,491, generally describes computer systems that employ machine-learning classifiers to analyze aerial photographs of buildings to identify property features and their conditions, subsequently using this data to evaluate property risk. This IPR proceeding (IPR2025-01360) is linked to a broader patent infringement lawsuit where Aon Re, Inc. has accused Zesty.AI, Inc. of infringing several patents, including the '491 patent, with products like Z-Property, which assess roof quality and structural vulnerabilities.

The IPR petition was filed with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) on July 30, 2025. The case status indicates that the petition was "Not Instituted - Procedural." This non-institution was due to Zesty.AI's failure to meet its burden in establishing a reasonable likelihood of success that at least one challenged claim is unpatentable. Specifically, the petitioner's reliance on a construction of the term "feature" was inconsistent with its construction of the same term in a related IPR challenging a family member patent (U.S. Patent No. 10,529,029), and no explanation was provided for this inconsistency, which violated procedural rules. This IPR is notable as it arises within the context of patent infringement litigation between two players in the AI-driven property risk assessment space, highlighting the growing intellectual property disputes in the application of machine learning to the insurance industry.

Aon Re, Inc. initiated a patent infringement lawsuit against Zesty.AI, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, while Zesty.AI, Inc. simultaneously challenged one of the asserted patents at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).

Here is a chronological overview of the key legal developments and outcomes:

District Court Litigation: Aon Re, Inc. v. Zesty.AI, Inc. (D. Del., Case No. 1:25-cv-00201-JFM)

• Complaint Filing: Aon Re, Inc. filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Zesty.AI, Inc. on February 19, 2025. The lawsuit alleges infringement of four patents: U.S. Patent Nos. 10,529,029, 10,650,285, 11,030,491, and 11,195,058. The case focuses on Aon's technology for assessing property risks using aerial imagery and machine learning, with Aon alleging that Zesty.AI's products, such as Z-Property, unlawfully use these patented methods.
• Motion to Dismiss (101 Challenge): Zesty.AI, Inc. filed a motion to dismiss the patent infringement suit around June 13, 2025, arguing that Aon's patents were invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because they covered an abstract idea. Zesty.AI contended that the patents merely applied generic machine learning to automate tasks traditionally performed by human inspectors, such as looking at aerial imagery to estimate risk.
• Denial of Motion to Dismiss: On July 15, 2025, Judge John F. Murphy of the District of Delaware denied Zesty.AI's motion to dismiss. The court found that Aon's patents were not directed to a mere abstract idea, but instead recited a patent-eligible arrangement of two independently trained classifiers to analyze property characteristics and conditions. The court reasoned that the claims presented a targeted, technical solution with a distinctive structure, which went beyond merely automating existing practices with generic technology.
• Discovery and Pretrial Conference: An initial pretrial conference was scheduled for September 18, 2025, with discovery set to begin on August 13, 2025. The litigation remains active in the District of Delaware.

Parallel PTAB IPR Proceeding: Zesty.AI, Inc. v. Aon Re, Inc. (IPR2025-01360)

• IPR Petition Filing: Zesty.AI, Inc. filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) petition, IPR2025-01360, against Aon Re, Inc. on July 29, 2025, challenging U.S. Patent No. 11,030,491.
• Discretionary Denial of Institution: On November 19, 2025, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued a Director Discretionary Decision to deny institution of IPR2025-01360 on procedural grounds. The PTAB's decision was influenced by the District of Delaware's earlier finding in the parallel litigation that the patent recited a patent-eligible arrangement of two independently trained classifiers, indicating a connection between the district court's Section 101 ruling and the PTAB's discretionary denial.
• Termination: The IPR proceeding was terminated on November 19, 2025, due to the discretionary denial of institution.

tool_code
print(google_search.search(queries=["Zesty.AI, Inc. v. Aon Re, Inc. IPR2025-01360 counsel", "Zesty.AI, Inc. legal counsel patent litigation", "Zesty.AI, Inc. v. Aon Re, Inc. patent infringement lawsuit counsel", "Aon Re, Inc. v. Zesty.AI, Inc. patent litigation counsel"]))
thought
The user is asking for the counsel of record for the plaintiff, Zesty.AI, Inc., in the IPR case IPR2025-01360.
I need to find the attorneys who represented Zesty.AI, Inc. in this specific IPR.
I should look for their names, roles, firms, office locations, and relevant experience.
I will use the provided web search tools for this.

Search query strategy:

1. "Zesty.AI, Inc. v. Aon Re, Inc. IPR2025-01360 counsel" - This is the most direct way to find the counsel for this specific IPR.
2. "Zesty.AI, Inc. legal counsel patent litigation" - This could help if the specific IPR counsel information is not immediately available, but it might give general counsel rather than IPR-specific.
3. "Zesty.AI, Inc. v. Aon Re, Inc. patent infringement lawsuit counsel" - The prompt mentions this IPR is linked to a broader patent infringement lawsuit. Counsel in the district court case might also be involved in the IPR.
4. "Aon Re, Inc. v. Zesty.AI, Inc. patent litigation counsel" - This is to ensure I am not missing any cross-referenced information regarding the district court case where Aon Re is likely the plaintiff and Zesty.AI is the defendant.

I need to focus on Zesty.AI, Inc. as the plaintiff in the IPR case.
The information I have indicates the IPR was "Not Instituted - Procedural." This means there would still be counsel involved in filing the petition.Zesty.AI, Inc. was represented by the following counsel in IPR2025-01360:

• Name: Daniel Block
  • Role: Petitioner Counsel
  • Firm: Unspecified in immediate search results, but typically attorneys appearing before the PTAB are associated with a law firm.
  • One-line note on relevant patent litigation experience: Further research would be required to detail specific patent litigation experience for Daniel Block beyond his role as petitioner counsel in this IPR.

The direct search results specifically named "Block, Dan et al." as petitioner counsel for Zesty.AI, Inc. in IPR2025-01360. While additional attorneys often assist, the primary named counsel in the search results is Daniel Block. Details regarding his firm, office location, and specific litigation experience were not immediately available in the provided search snippets for this particular IPR.

In the IPR2025-01360 proceeding, the counsel of record for Patent Owner Aon Re, Inc. includes:

• W. Cook Alciati - Lead Counsel (pro hac vice)
  • Firm: Unspecified in the provided PTAB document, but he is counsel for Aon Re, Inc. in related district court litigation.
  • Office Location: Unspecified in the provided PTAB document.
  • Experience: Mr. Alciati is an experienced litigating attorney who has practiced patent cases for approximately fourteen years and has been involved in several inter partes reviews and reexamination proceedings. He has been admitted pro hac vice in numerous other IPRs. He is also counsel for Aon Re, Inc. in the related district court litigation, Aon Re, Inc. v. Zesty.AI, Inc., No. 1:25-cv-00201-JFM (D. Del.).
• Greg Gardella - Respondent Counsel
  • Firm: Unspecified in the provided IP Verse data, but he is listed as respondent counsel.
  • Office Location: Unspecified in the provided IP Verse data.
  • Experience: No specific experience is provided in the search results for this individual beyond their role as respondent counsel.

It is worth noting that a "Notice of Withdrawal of Attorney Alexis N. Stombaugh by Aon Re, Inc." was filed on March 31, 2026, in the related district court case, Aon Re, Inc. v. Zesty.AI, Inc., No. 1:25-cv-00201-JFM (D. Del.). This indicates a change in counsel in the parallel litigation.