Patent 10117625
PTAB challenges
AIA trial proceedings at the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board — IPR, PGR, and CBM. Petitioners, judge panels, claim-level invalidation outcomes from Final Written Decisions, and Federal Circuit appeals. The single most important defensive datapoint after litigation history.
Active provider: Google · gemini-2.5-flash
Proceedings on file (0)
All PTAB activity →AIA trial proceedings (IPR / PGR / CBM) filed at the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board against this patent. Sourced from the USPTO Open Data Portal and refreshed every six hours; each proceeding number deep-links to the PTAB E2E docket.
No PTAB proceedings on file. This patent has not been challenged via IPR, PGR, or CBM. The absence is itself a signal — well-asserted patents eventually attract IPRs. The LLM analysis below may surface filings the ODP feed hasn’t indexed yet.
PTAB challenges
AIA trial proceedings at the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board — IPR, PGR, and CBM. Petitioners, judge panels, claim-level invalidation outcomes from Final Written Decisions, and Federal Circuit appeals. The single most important defensive datapoint after litigation history.
Proceedings overview
As of the current date, there are no publicly available records of any AIA trial proceedings (Inter Partes Review, Post-Grant Review, or Covered Business Method review) filed against US patent 10117625 with the USPTO's Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). The USPTO ODP API returns no AIA trial proceedings for this patent, and web searches did not surface any older or recently-filed proceedings. This indicates that the patent, US10117625, has not been challenged through the AIA trial processes. This gives a defendant facing assertion of this patent a completely open defensive posture, as no claims have been invalidated or sustained by the PTAB, and all prior art grounds remain available for challenge.
Strategic summary
Since there is no PTAB activity on file for US10117625, all claims (1-20) remain untested by the PTAB. There are no canceled or sustained claims through an AIA trial proceeding.
The estoppel landscape is entirely open. Since no IPRs have been filed, Section 315(e)(2) estoppel does not apply to any potential petitioner or their privies. This means that any defendant currently being asserted against can raise any available prior-art grounds, including those that could have been raised in an IPR, without being barred by previous PTAB decisions.
There are no patterns of filings by a specific petitioner, no aggressive pursuit of PTAB appeals by the patent owner, and no involvement of defensive aggregators like Unified Patents, as there are simply no PTAB proceedings to observe for this patent.
Recommended next steps
If you are a defendant facing assertion of US10117625, the absence of PTAB activity is a significant signal. It suggests that the patent has not yet undergone the scrutiny of an AIA trial. Your recommended next steps would be:
- Consider filing your own AIA trial petition: Given the absence of prior PTAB challenges, you have a clear path to challenge the patentability of the claims based on prior art under Sections 102 (novelty) and/or 103 (obviousness). This could be an Inter Partes Review (IPR) for patentability challenges based on patents or printed publications.
- Conduct a thorough prior art search: Since no prior art has been adjudicated by the PTAB against this patent, a comprehensive search for patents and printed publications that anticipate or render obvious the claims of US10117625 is crucial.
- Evaluate claims individually: Analyze each claim of US10117625 to identify potential weaknesses in light of the prior art and to formulate strong invalidity arguments.
- Monitor for future PTAB filings: While no proceedings are currently active, it is advisable to regularly check the USPTO's Patent Trial and Appeal Case Tracking System (P-TACTS) (https://search.uspto.gov/ptacts/) for any newly filed petitions against this patent, as the landscape can change rapidly.
Generated 6/2/2026, 12:45:50 PM