Patent 10289547
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
A search of the USPTO Open Data Portal API and supplemental web searches indicate no active or concluded AIA trial proceedings (Inter Partes Review, Post-Grant Review, or Covered Business Method) have been filed against US patent 10289547 as of 2026-06-25. Therefore, all claims of the patent remain untested in an AIA trial context, presenting a clean slate for a potential defendant.
Strategic summary
As of the current date, all claims of US patent 10289547 are UNTESTED in any AIA trial proceeding. This means that no claims have been canceled or sustained by the PTAB, and no institution decisions have been made. For a defendant facing assertion of this patent, this absence of PTAB activity implies that the patent has not been subjected to the scrutiny of an IPR, PGR, or CBM.
The estoppel landscape is entirely open. Since no PTAB proceedings have occurred, there are no prior-art grounds that are barred from being raised by a potential petitioner under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2). All available prior art can still be presented in a new petition for IPR or PGR, assuming the statutory deadlines for filing such petitions are met. There is no pattern of PTAB challenges, aggressive appeals by the patent owner, or involvement of defensive aggregators to analyze.
Recommended next steps
Since no PTAB activity exists for US patent 10289547, the recommended next steps for a potential defendant would be to:
- Conduct a comprehensive prior art search: Identify the strongest prior art references to challenge the patentability of the claims, particularly focusing on claims 1, 10, and 17 which are independent claims.
- Evaluate IPR/PGR eligibility and timing: Determine if the statutory window for filing an IPR or PGR petition is still open and if the identified prior art grounds are suitable for such proceedings. IPRs typically target patents on §§ 102 and 103 grounds using patents and printed publications, while PGRs have a broader scope including § 112 and § 101 grounds and additional prior art types, but must be filed within nine months of the patent's grant date or reissue. Given the patent's issue date of 2019-05-14, the window for a PGR has long since closed. An IPR remains a possibility, subject to statutory one-year bar from service of a complaint.
- Assess potential for a new IPR: If an infringement assertion is received, evaluate the feasibility and cost-benefit of initiating an IPR against the asserted claims based on the strongest prior art found.
Generated 6/25/2026, 6:03:34 PM