PTAB challenges

Proceedings overview

There are no AIA trial proceedings on file for US Patent 10749443 according to the USPTO Open Data Portal and supplementary web searches. This means the patent's validity has not been challenged through Inter Partes Review (IPR), Post-Grant Review (PGR), or Covered Business Method (CBM) proceedings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). For a defendant, this implies that the patent claims have not been subjected to PTAB scrutiny, and an IPR or PGR defense based on prior art patents and printed publications, or other statutory grounds, remains a viable option.

Strategic summary

As of July 9, 2026, all claims of US Patent 10749443 remain untested by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. There are no records of IPRs, PGRs, or CBMs having been filed against this patent. Consequently, all 14 claims (Independent Claims 1, 12, 13, 14, and dependent claims) are considered valid and patentable in the absence of any PTAB decision to the contrary.

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 or defendant. This means any prior art patents or printed publications, or other statutory grounds for invalidity, could still be asserted in a new IPR or PGR petition, assuming the statutory deadlines for filing such petitions are met in relation to any litigation.

The absence of PTAB activity is a notable signal. Patents that are actively asserted and valuable often become targets for IPRs or PGRs. The lack of such challenges for US10749443 could indicate that it has not been extensively asserted in the past, or that potential challengers have not yet identified strong grounds for invalidity that warrant a PTAB petition. Given the recent litigation filed by Wolfspeed against Navitas Semiconductor alleging infringement of US10749443, it is possible that PTAB challenges may emerge in the future.

Recommended next steps

Since no PTAB activity exists for US Patent 10749443, a defendant facing assertion of this patent should consider the following:

• Prior Art Search: Conduct a thorough prior art search to identify any patents or printed publications that could potentially render the claims of US10749443 unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 or 103.
• PGR/IPR Feasibility Assessment: If strong prior art is found, evaluate the feasibility and strategic advantages of filing a Post-Grant Review (PGR) or Inter Partes Review (IPR) petition with the PTAB.
  • PGR: Must be filed within nine months of the patent's issuance (August 18, 2020), and can challenge claims on any ground of invalidity (e.g., §§ 101, 102, 103, 112, except best mode). Given the patent's issue date of August 18, 2020, the nine-month window for filing a PGR has passed.
  • IPR: Can be filed after the later of nine months after the patent's grant date, or if a PGR was instituted, the termination of the PGR. An IPR can challenge claims only on grounds of anticipation (§ 102) or obviousness (§ 103), and only on the basis of prior art consisting of patents or printed publications. An IPR must be filed within 12 months of being served with a complaint alleging infringement.
• Monitor PTAB Filings: Continuously monitor the USPTO's Patent Trial and Appeal Case Tracking System (P-TACTS) for any newly filed petitions against US10749443, particularly in light of the ongoing litigation.
• Coordinate with Litigation Strategy: Any decision to initiate a PTAB proceeding should be carefully coordinated with the overall district court litigation strategy, considering potential stays, claim construction, and estoppel implications.