Patent 11358953
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 on file for US Patent 11358953. This absence suggests that the patent has not yet been challenged through IPR, PGR, or CBM trials at the USPTO. This means that all claims of US11358953 are currently untested at the PTAB, but it's important to note that all claims have been ruled invalid by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
Strategic summary
As of June 24, 2026, there are no PTAB proceedings (IPR, PGR, or CBM) on file for US Patent 11358953. This means that at the PTAB, all claims of the patent are currently UNTESTED.
However, it is crucial to reiterate the overriding impact of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) decision. The CAFC has affirmed a lower court's decision, ruling that all claims of US Patent 11,358,953 are invalid. This means that, despite the lack of PTAB activity, the claims of this patent have been legally nullified.
Therefore, the estoppel landscape and the status of individual claims for the purpose of PTAB analysis are moot. The CAFC decision, as the highest court to rule on the patent's validity, takes precedence over any potential PTAB findings. There are no prior-art grounds that are still available for a defendant to challenge in an IPR, as the entire patent has been declared invalid.
Recommended next steps
Given the CAFC's ruling that all claims of US Patent 11,358,953 are invalid, the primary next step for any defendant facing assertion of this patent is to cite the Federal Circuit's decision. The claims are no longer legally enforceable. The litigation summary indicates the case numbers involved at both the Massachusetts District Court (1:22-cv-10967) and the CAFC (25-1427). A defendant should refer to the CAFC's opinion for the precise disposition and reasoning.
The absence of PTAB activity is overshadowed by the complete invalidation of the patent's claims by the Federal Circuit.
Generated 6/24/2026, 12:02:41 AM