Patent 11110081
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.
Current assignee: Veloxis Pharmaceuticals AS
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
As of 2026-06-01, there are no AIA trial proceedings (Inter Partes Review, Post-Grant Review, or Covered Business Method review) on file for US Patent 11110081 in the USPTO Open Data Portal, nor have any been identified through web searches. This indicates that the patent has not yet been challenged in these specific administrative trial forums at the PTAB.
Strategic summary
Given the absence of any PTAB proceedings, all claims of US11110081 remain untested by IPR, PGR, or CBM challenges. This means there are no claims that have been canceled or sustained by a PTAB Final Written Decision. Consequently, a defendant facing assertion of this patent would not be able to rely on prior PTAB invalidations to narrow the scope of the claims. The estoppel provisions of § 315(e)(2) are not applicable, as no petition has been instituted. All prior art grounds are still available for a defendant to raise in a new PTAB petition or in district court litigation. The lack of PTAB activity could imply either that the patent has not been heavily asserted, or that potential challengers have opted for other strategies (e.g., district court litigation only, licensing, or deemed the patent not vulnerable to PTAB challenges).
Recommended next steps
Since no PTAB activity exists for US Patent 11110081, a potential defendant has a clear path to file an IPR or PGR petition if they believe the patent claims are unpatentable over prior art. The absence of previous challenges means there is no pre-existing PTAB record to navigate for claim-level outcomes or estoppel. This allows a petitioner to choose their best prior art and arguments without being constrained by prior institution decisions or final written decisions. A thorough prior art search would be the crucial first step to identify strong grounds for a petition.
Generated 6/1/2026, 12:47:09 AM