PTAB challenges

Proceedings overview

There is one AIA trial proceeding on file for US Patent 10928796, which is currently active and in the trial instituted phase. This proceeding challenges the patentability of claims and presents an ongoing defensive posture for any defendant facing assertion of this patent.

IPR2025-01369 — GUANGZHOU EKO TRADING DEVELOPMENT CO., LTD et al. v. Nine Stars Group USA Inc.

• Type: Inter Partes Review
• Filed: 2025-08-13
• Status: Trial Instituted. This means the PTAB has determined that the petitioner has a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on at least one challenged claim and has initiated a full review of the patentability of those claims.
• Judge panel: The specific judge panel for IPR2025-01369 is not publicly available in the provided information.
• Petition grounds: The specific claims challenged, the prior art references asserted, and the statutory bases (e.g., obviousness under § 103, anticipation under § 102) are not publicly available in the provided information for this specific IPR.
• Institution decision: The PTAB instituted review for IPR2025-01369. The specific date of institution and the detailed reasoning of the panel are not available in the provided search results. Institution decisions typically occur within six months of the petition filing date.
• Final Written Decision (if issued): A Final Written Decision has not yet been issued, as the proceeding is still in the "Trial Instituted" phase. The statutory deadline for a Final Written Decision is typically one year from the institution date.
• Settlement / termination: There is no public information regarding settlement or termination for this proceeding.
• Appeal: No appeal to the Federal Circuit has been filed, consistent with the absence of a Final Written Decision.
• Defensive value: This active IPR creates uncertainty regarding the patentability of the challenged claims. A defendant currently facing assertion of this patent could potentially benefit if claims are ultimately invalidated. Monitoring this proceeding is crucial, as a favorable outcome for the petitioner could significantly weaken the patent owner's infringement arguments.

Strategic summary

Currently, the patent US10928796 is subject to one active Inter Partes Review, IPR2025-01369. Since a Final Written Decision has not yet been issued, all claims of US10928796 remain untested by a final PTAB ruling. There are no claims that have been definitively canceled or sustained through PTAB proceedings at this time.

Regarding the estoppel landscape, if IPR2025-01369 proceeds to a Final Written Decision, the petitioner (GUANGZHOU EKO TRADING DEVELOPMENT CO., LTD et al.) and its privies or real parties in interest would be estopped under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2) from asserting in other proceedings any ground of invalidity that they raised or reasonably could have raised during the IPR. For a defendant currently being asserted against, the availability of prior-art grounds outside of those raised in this IPR would depend on their relationship with the petitioner and whether they are considered privy. The petitioner in IPR2025-01369, Guangzhou EKO Trading Development Co., Ltd., is also a defendant in a district court case (5:24-cv-01843) filed by Nine Stars Group USA Inc., the likely patent owner in the IPR.

In terms of pattern signals, the filing of an IPR by the same entity (Guangzhou EKO Trading Development Co., Ltd. et al.) that is a defendant in a parallel district court case (5:24-cv-01843) suggests a coordinated defense strategy to challenge the patent's validity. The involvement of "Unified Patents Inc." as a petitioner in a PTAB case IPR2025-01369 was initially indicated in the prior litigation summary, but the PTAB proceedings on file block explicitly lists "GUANGZHOU EKO TRADING DEVELOPMENT CO., LTD et al." as the petitioner for IPR2025-01369. This discrepancy should be noted, with the PTAB proceedings on file block taking precedence as the canonical source for the specific IPR.

Recommended next steps

For a defendant currently facing assertion of US10928796, the following steps are recommended:

• Monitor IPR2025-01369 closely: Since the IPR is "Trial Instituted," the next significant milestone will be the Final Written Decision, which is due approximately one year from the institution date. This decision will determine the patentability of the challenged claims. Accessing the official docket for IPR2025-01369 on the USPTO PTAB E2E portal would provide the institution date, judge panel, specific claims challenged, and prior art asserted, as well as subsequent orders and filings.
• Assess potential impact: Understand which specific claims are being challenged in IPR2025-01369. If the defendant's alleged infringement relies on claims that are currently under review in the IPR, a successful invalidation could significantly weaken the plaintiff's case.
• Review institution decision: Once the institution decision and associated petition grounds are publicly available on the PTAB E2E portal, analyze the PTAB's reasoning for instituting the trial. This will provide insight into the strength of the invalidity arguments the Board found compelling.
• Consider estoppel: Understand the implications of estoppel under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2) for Guangzhou EKO Trading Development Co., Ltd. and any privies. This will define which invalidity arguments, if any, they would be barred from raising in subsequent proceedings.