Patent 11037094
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
There are no AIA trial proceedings (Inter Partes Review, Post-Grant Review, or Covered Business Method) on file for US patent 11037094 as of July 2, 2026. Neither the USPTO Open Data Portal nor web searches for "PTAB US11037094" or related terms yielded any results for such proceedings.
Strategic summary
As of the current date, US patent 11037094 has not been subjected to any AIA trial challenges at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). This means all claims (Claims 1-19) of the patent remain untested in the context of IPR, PGR, or CBM proceedings. There is no estoppel landscape from PTAB decisions to consider, as no institution decisions or final written decisions have been issued.
While there is no PTAB activity, it's worth noting that the patent owner, Zest Labs Inc., has been involved in significant district court litigation concerning its "Zest Fresh" technology, which is related to the actively managed food delivery described in the patent. Zest Labs filed a $2 billion complaint against Walmart in August 2018, alleging trade secret misappropriation regarding Walmart's "Eden" food freshness technology. This litigation resulted in a jury awarding Zest Labs $115 million in 2021, a verdict that was later set aside, and a retrial in May 2025 where a jury awarded Zest Labs $222 million in compensatory and punitive damages. Walmart subsequently settled the dispute confidentially in July 2025. While this lawsuit is highly relevant to the commercialization and enforcement of Zest Labs' intellectual property, it is distinct from PTAB validity challenges to the patent itself.
Recommended next steps
Since no PTAB activity exists for US11037094, the recommended next steps for a potential defendant would involve:
- Prior Art Search: Conduct a thorough prior art search to identify any patents or publications that could form the basis for an Inter Partes Review (IPR) petition against the patent's claims under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and/or 103.
- Claim Construction Analysis: Perform a detailed claim construction analysis of US11037094 to understand the scope of the claims and potential non-infringement arguments.
- Invalidity Contentions: Develop robust invalidity contentions based on the prior art search, which could be used in a district court litigation or as the basis for a PTAB petition if one is deemed viable.
- Monitoring: Continuously monitor the PTAB dockets for any newly filed petitions against US11037094 or related patents owned by Zest Labs Inc.
Generated 7/2/2026, 6:45:33 PM