PTAB challenges

Proceedings overview

There is one AIA trial proceeding on file for US Patent 10110725: IPR2025-01427. This proceeding is listed with a "Terminated" status, specifically "Procedural Termination," indicating it did not reach a Final Written Decision on the merits. This means that, regarding PTAB challenges, all claims of the patent remain untested on the merits.

IPR2025-01427 — [Apple Inc.](/litigations/by-plaintiff/Apple%20Inc.) v. Garin Toren

• Type: Inter Partes Review
• Filed: 2025-08-29 [cite: IPR2025-01427 — IPR — filed 2025-08-29]
• Status: Terminated (Procedural Termination) [cite: IPR2025-01427 — IPR — filed 2025-08-29, https://patents.google.com/patent/[US10110725](/patent/US10110725)/en] - The proceeding was terminated before a Final Written Decision on the patentability of the challenged claims.
• Judge panel: Information not found in public search results.
• Petition grounds: Information regarding specific claims challenged, prior art, and statutory bases (§ 102 / § 103 / § 112) for the petition grounds were not found in the provided patent text or public search results for a procedurally terminated IPR.
• Institution decision: Information on an institution decision was not found, which is typical for a case that undergoes "Procedural Termination" as it often occurs before or in lieu of a formal institution decision.
• Final Written Decision (if issued): Not issued. The proceeding was procedurally terminated.
• Settlement / termination: The proceeding was procedurally terminated on 2026-04-14 [cite: IPR2025-01427 — IPR — filed 2025-08-29]. The specific reasons or terms of termination (e.g., settlement) are not publicly detailed in the available information.
• Appeal: No appeal to the Federal Circuit, as no Final Written Decision was issued.
• Defensive value: This procedural termination means the patent's claims have not been subjected to a full PTAB review on the merits. Therefore, a defendant is not estopped from challenging the patent in a future IPR or in district court on any prior art grounds. The patent claims remain "live" for validity challenges.

Strategic summary

Currently, all claims of US10110725 are UNTESTED in the context of AIA trial proceedings. The single IPR filed, IPR2025-01427, was procedurally terminated, meaning no claims were canceled or sustained through a PTAB Final Written Decision. This indicates that the patent owner has not yet had to defend the patent's validity on the merits before the PTAB.

Regarding the estoppel landscape, since IPR2025-01427 was terminated without an institution decision or a Final Written Decision, neither the petitioner (Apple Inc.) nor its privies would be estopped under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(1) or § 315(e)(2) from raising prior art grounds in a subsequent proceeding. All prior-art grounds that could have been raised are still available for potential future challenges by any party, including Apple Inc., should they choose to file another IPR.

The pattern shows only one IPR attempt so far. The fact that it was procedurally terminated, rather than resulting in a full trial or institution denial, suggests that a resolution (possibly a settlement or other agreement) occurred between the parties before the PTAB rendered a decision on the merits. The petitioner was Apple Inc., a major operating company, indicating that the patent was asserted against a significant player.

Recommended next steps

• Since IPR2025-01427 was procedurally terminated and no Final Written Decision was issued, there are no claims that have been invalidated by the PTAB. Therefore, there is no FWD to link to for canceled claims.
• There are no active PTAB proceedings pending for US10110725. The IPR2025-01427 proceeding concluded with a procedural termination on 2026-04-14 [cite: IPR2025-01427 — IPR — filed 2025-08-29].
• The absence of an adjudicated PTAB proceeding means that any defendant facing assertion of this patent still has all validity challenges available, including filing their own IPR.