Litigation summary

Known Litigation for US Patent 10,403,051

As of May 9, 2026, US Patent 10,403,051 has been involved in significant litigation, primarily a single case with subsequent appellate and administrative proceedings.

District Court Litigation

• Case Name: NantWorks, LLC and Nant Holdings IP, LLC v. Niantic, Inc.
• Plaintiff(s): NantWorks, LLC; Nant Holdings IP, LLC
• Defendant(s): Niantic, Inc.
• Jurisdiction: U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
• Case Number: 3:20-cv-06262
• Filing Date: September 3, 2020
• Details & Outcome:
  • The plaintiffs alleged that Niantic's augmented reality games, including Pokémon Go and Harry Potter: Wizards Unite, infringed on US Patent 10,403,051, along with U.S. Patent Nos. 10,614,477 and 10,664,518. The complaint asserted that Niantic's applications, which superimpose AR objects over real-world environments and use features like dynamic weather, utilized the patented technology.
  • On July 9, 2024, the court granted Niantic's motion for summary judgment, finding claims 7, 22, 23, and 25 of the '051 patent invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The court determined the patent was directed to the abstract idea of "filtering or picking information or materials relevant to a location or context" without adding a sufficient inventive concept. The case was closed at the district court level with a judgment in favor of the defendant, Niantic.

Appellate Litigation

• Case Name: NantWorks, LLC, Nant Holdings IP, LLC v. Niantic, Inc.
• Plaintiff(s)-Appellant(s): NantWorks, LLC; Nant Holdings IP, LLC
• Defendant-Appellee: Niantic, Inc.
• Jurisdiction: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC)
• Case Number: 24-2216
• Details & Outcome:
  • NantWorks appealed the district court's summary judgment ruling. Oral arguments were held on February 3, 2026.
  • On April 23, 2026, the Federal Circuit issued a nonprecedential opinion affirming the district court's decision. It upheld the invalidation of the asserted claims of the '051 patent (along with claims from the '518 patent) under 35 U.S.C. § 101, agreeing that the claims were directed to an abstract idea without an inventive concept.

Administrative Proceedings (PTAB)

Based on information from the provided patent document and public records, there was an Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceeding related to this patent family, though not directly targeting US 10,403,051 itself. Public records indicate that after an IPR final written decision, the district court case stay was lifted while the appeal was pending. A search for IPR2021-01133, listed on the patent's Google Patents page, confirms a proceeding was filed, but it was not instituted on its merits. This suggests an attempt to challenge the patent's validity at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) was unsuccessful at the institution phase.