PTAB challenges

Proceedings overview

Currently, there is one active AIA trial proceeding on US patent 11672377: IPR2025-01530, which has been instituted. This means that the patent is currently undergoing validity review at the PTAB, and no claims have been invalidated or sustained by a Final Written Decision yet. The defensive posture for a defendant facing assertion of this patent is that the validity of its claims is being actively challenged in an instituted IPR.

IPR2025-01530 — RJ Brands, LLC d/b/a Chefman v. Sharkninja Operating LLC

• Type: Inter Partes Review
• Filed: 2025-09-12
• Status: Trial Instituted (meaning the PTAB has authorized a trial to proceed on the challenged claims).
• Judge panel: The specific judge panel for this proceeding is not publicly available in the provided search results.
• Petition grounds: The specific claims challenged, prior art references, and statutory bases (§ 102 / § 103 / § 112) for this IPR are not explicitly detailed in the provided search results.
• Institution decision: Instituted on 2026-05-06. The reasoning for the institution is not publicly available in the provided snippets, but the decision outcome was "Institution Granted".
• Final Written Decision: Not yet issued, as the proceeding is currently in the trial phase.
• Settlement / termination: Not applicable, as the proceeding is active and instituted.
• Appeal: Not applicable, as no Final Written Decision has been issued.
• Defensive value: The institution of IPR2025-01530 indicates that the PTAB found a reasonable likelihood that at least one challenged claim of US11672377B2 is unpatentable. While no claims have been invalidated yet, the ongoing trial means the patent's validity is under scrutiny. Any assertion of claims in this patent should be viewed in light of this pending challenge, as claims could potentially be canceled.

Strategic summary

Currently, all claims of US patent 11672377 are UNTESTED by a Final Written Decision in a PTAB proceeding. The only active proceeding, IPR2025-01530, has been instituted but has not yet reached a final verdict on the patentability of the challenged claims. Therefore, there are no canceled or sustained claims yet to report from PTAB trials.

Regarding the estoppel landscape, since IPR2025-01530 has not resulted in a Final Written Decision, no statutory estoppel under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2) has yet attached for the petitioner, RJ Brands, LLC d/b/a Chefman, or their privies. This means that if the trial were to conclude without a Final Written Decision on the merits (e.g., through settlement before FWD), the petitioner might not be barred from raising the same grounds or any grounds that could have reasonably been raised in other proceedings. However, various discretionary denial factors, including those related to parallel litigation and inconsistent claim constructions, have become more prominent at the PTAB, especially since late 2025, under Director John Squires.

There are no apparent pattern signals such as multiple IPRs filed by the same petitioner on this specific patent, nor aggressive PTAB appeals by the patent owner. Unified Patents is listed as a source for PTAB data, but it is not indicated as a petitioner in this specific case.

Recommended next steps

Since IPR2025-01530 has been instituted, a Final Written Decision is expected within one year of the institution date, which was May 6, 2026. This means the Final Written Decision should be due by May 6, 2027. Defendants currently facing assertion of this patent should monitor the progress of IPR2025-01530 closely to understand the ultimate disposition of the challenged claims. The outcome of this IPR will significantly impact the strength and scope of the patent for future assertion or licensing discussions.