Patent 11301898
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
As of the current date, there are no AIA trial proceedings on file for U.S. Patent 11,301,898 in the USPTO Open Data Portal. This indicates that the patent has not yet faced challenges through Inter Partes Review (IPR), Post-Grant Review (PGR), or Covered Business Method (CBM) proceedings. For a defendant, this means the patent has not been tested at the PTAB, and all claims are currently sustained as granted.
Strategic summary
Currently, all claims (1-15) of U.S. Patent 11,301,898 are sustained as granted, as there have been no PTAB proceedings to challenge their patentability. Since no IPRs or other AIA trials have been filed, there is no estoppel landscape to consider under § 315(e)(2); all prior-art grounds remain available for a potential petitioner.
The absence of PTAB activity for this patent, despite its membership in a family that has been actively litigated by Almondnet Inc., is notable. This could indicate that potential challengers have not yet identified strong prior art against the specific claims of this patent, or that the patent has not yet been asserted in a manner that would provoke an IPR filing. The litigation history of its family members (e.g., U.S. Patent Nos. 8,671,139, 7,822,639, and 9,830,615) suggests that the patent owner is willing to assert its intellectual property, which often leads to PTAB challenges.
Recommended next steps
Given the lack of PTAB activity for U.S. Patent 11,301,898, a defendant facing assertion of this patent should consider the following:
- Prior Art Search: Conduct a thorough prior art search specifically tailored to the claims of U.S. Patent 11,301,898 to identify strong invalidity grounds under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103. The examiner's prior art (Shin, Zadoff, Raman) and the patent's own background section (discussing "price that BT company #1 promised to pay weather.com") should be carefully re-evaluated for potential obviousness arguments, especially considering the "obviousness combination" scenario outlined in the analysis.
- PTAB Petition Assessment: If strong prior art is found, evaluate the viability of filing an Inter Partes Review (IPR) petition. The absence of previous PTAB challenges means there are no prior institution decisions or final written decisions to navigate, and the full range of prior art (patents and printed publications) is available.
- Monitoring: Continuously monitor for any newly filed PTAB proceedings against U.S. Patent 11,301,898 or its continuing applications, as this landscape can change rapidly.
Generated 5/30/2026, 12:45:24 AM