PTAB challenges

Proceedings overview

As of May 29, 2026, U.S. Patent No. 11,470,138 has been challenged in two inter partes review (IPR) proceedings at the PTAB. One proceeding, IPR2024-00044, reached a Final Written Decision, while IPR2025-00469 was not instituted due to procedural reasons.

IPR2024-00044 — Aylo Freesites Ltd. v. DISH Technologies L.L.C.

• Type: Inter Partes Review
• Filed: The precise filing date for the petition is not explicitly provided in the patent text, but the status indicates "Final Written Decision" for IPR2024-00044.
• Status: Final Written Decision
• Judge panel: Not publicly available in the provided text.
• Petition grounds: Not publicly available in the provided text.
• Institution decision: Not publicly available in the provided text.
• Final Written Decision (if issued): The provided text indicates that IPR2024-00044 reached a "Final Written Decision" but does not specify the claim-level outcome or the panel's reasoning.
• Settlement / termination: Not publicly available in the provided text.
• Appeal: Not publicly available in the provided text.
• Defensive value: Without the claim-level outcomes of the Final Written Decision, the defensive value of this proceeding for a defendant is unclear. If claims were invalidated, it could significantly weaken an assertion.

IPR2025-00469 — Petitioner: [Not specified] v. DISH Technologies L.L.C.

• Type: Inter Partes Review
• Filed: The precise filing date for the petition is not explicitly provided in the patent text, but the status indicates "Not Instituted - Procedural" for IPR2025-00469.
• Status: Not Instituted - Procedural
• Judge panel: Not publicly available in the provided text.
• Petition grounds: Not publicly available in the provided text.
• Institution decision: Not Instituted - Procedural. The provided text states the status as "Not Instituted - Procedural". This indicates that the PTAB did not proceed with a full review, likely due to a technical or procedural deficiency in the petition itself, rather than a judgment on the merits of the patentability arguments.
• Final Written Decision (if issued): No Final Written Decision was issued as institution was denied.
• Settlement / termination: Not publicly available in the provided text.
• Appeal: Not publicly available in the provided text.
• Defensive value: This proceeding offers no direct defensive value as no claims were invalidated, and the institution was denied on procedural grounds, not on the merits of the prior art. It does not prevent future IPR challenges on substantive grounds.

Strategic summary

U.S. Patent No. 11,470,138 has faced challenges at the PTAB, with one inter partes review (IPR2024-00044) reaching a Final Written Decision. However, the provided information does not detail which claims, if any, were cancelled or sustained in that decision. A second IPR (IPR2025-00469) was not instituted due to procedural reasons, meaning the claims were not substantively reviewed in that instance.

The lack of detailed outcomes for IPR2024-00044 makes it difficult to ascertain which claims of US 11,470,138 are now canceled versus sustained versus untested. To fully understand the estoppel landscape and which prior-art grounds are still available for a defendant, the contents of the Final Written Decision for IPR2024-00044 would need to be reviewed. The information does not indicate if the same petitioner filed multiple IPRs or if the patent owner pursued PTAB appeals aggressively. There is no indication of a defensive aggregator like Unified Patents in the chain of PTAB proceedings.

Recommended next steps

To understand the full defensive value and the status of claims for a defendant, the Final Written Decision for IPR2024-00044 needs to be thoroughly reviewed. This document would specify which claims were found unpatentable and provide the PTAB's reasoning. A defendant facing assertion of this patent should:

• Obtain and analyze the full Final Written Decision for IPR2024-00044 to determine the exact claim-level outcomes. This decision would be publicly available on the USPTO PTAB Decisions portal.
• Based on the FWD, assess the validity of any claims being asserted against them. If asserted claims were canceled, this forms a strong basis for defense.
• Consider the procedural denial of IPR2025-00469 as a technicality, which does not preclude new, well-formed IPR petitions against the patent.