PTAB challenges

Proceedings overview

One Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceeding has been filed against US Patent 11,235,110. This IPR, IPR2025-01460, was not instituted on procedural grounds, which means the patent has survived this challenge and its claims remain intact. This gives the patent owner a strong defensive posture against this particular petitioner and any grounds that could have been reasonably raised.

IPR2025-01460 — Porta Sophia v. Monster Color Carnival LLC

• Type: Inter Partes Review (IPR)
• Filed: 2025-08-22
• Status: Not Instituted - Procedural. This means the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) declined to initiate a full trial on the merits for a procedural reason, rather than on the patentability arguments themselves.
• Judge panel: The specific judge panel for this procedurally denied IPR is not publicly detailed in the readily available search results.
• Petition grounds: Details regarding the specific claims challenged and prior art cited by Porta Sophia in their petition are not publicly detailed in the available search results, likely due to the procedural denial of institution.
• Institution decision: Institution was denied on 2026-02-10. The denial was procedural, indicating that the PTAB exercised its discretion not to institute review. The specific reasoning for this discretionary denial is not explicitly stated in the public snippets, but recent USPTO policy has involved stricter IPR procedures, including discretionary denials based on various factors (e.g., related district court litigation, RPI identification, or multiple petitions with differing claim constructions).
• Final Written Decision: Not applicable, as institution was denied.
• Settlement / termination: Not applicable, as institution was denied.
• Appeal: Not applicable, as institution was denied.
• Defensive value: The procedural denial of IPR2025-01460 means that the claims of US11,235,110 remain undisturbed by this particular challenge. For a defendant facing assertion of this patent, it signals that an IPR challenge by Porta Sophia on the same or reasonably similar grounds would be estopped under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(1).

Strategic summary

Currently, all claims of US Patent 11,235,110 are SUSTAINED and UNTESTED by a Final Written Decision, as the single IPR filed against it, IPR2025-01460, was denied institution on procedural grounds. This means that no claims have been canceled or found unpatentable through PTAB trial. The patent owner, Monster Color Carnival LLC, successfully navigated this IPR challenge by having the petition denied at the institution stage.

The estoppel landscape is favorable for the patent owner regarding IPR2025-01460. Under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(1), Porta Sophia, and any parties in privity with them, are estopped from asserting in a civil action or another USPTO proceeding that a claim of the patent is invalid on any ground that was raised or reasonably could have been raised during the IPR. This means that any future challenges from Porta Sophia or its privies would face significant hurdles. For other potential defendants, the prior-art grounds available for challenging US11,235,110 through an IPR are still open, provided they are not in privity with Porta Sophia.

The filing of an IPR by Porta Sophia, a non-profit prior art library focused on psychedelic patents, indicates that entities are actively monitoring and challenging patents in this space. Porta Sophia aims to protect the public domain by identifying and leveraging prior art against what they consider "high-threat patents" attempting to monopolize existing technologies and knowledge, particularly in psychedelics. This pattern suggests that future assertions of this patent might attract similar scrutiny.

Recommended next steps

• Since IPR2025-01460 was denied institution, there is no Final Written Decision to link to for claim cancellation. The patent's claims remain valid as challenged in this proceeding.
• There are no active PTAB proceedings currently pending against US11,235,110 that have been instituted.
• While the patent survived this initial IPR challenge at the institution phase, the fact that a non-profit like Porta Sophia targeted it suggests that potential challengers exist in the psychedelic patent landscape. Future defendants should be prepared for potential validity challenges, either through new IPR petitions from different entities or in district court litigation.