Patent 11709037
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.
Current assignee: Titan Technologies International Inc
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 (Inter Partes Review, Post-Grant Review, or Covered Business Method review) on file for U.S. Patent No. 11,709,037 as of the current date, 2026-05-30. The USPTO Open Data Portal API indicates no such proceedings, and a comprehensive web search for "US11709037 IPR", "US11709037 PTAB", "US 11709037 inter partes review", and "US 11709037 post-grant review" did not yield any records of PTAB challenges.
Strategic summary
As of today, U.S. Patent No. 11,709,037 has all its claims untested by any AIA trial proceedings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). This means that no claims have been canceled or sustained through an IPR, PGR, or CBM. The patent is currently in litigation in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada (case number 2:24-cv-00861), with an appeal filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (docket number 26-1731). However, the validity of its claims has not been subjected to PTAB scrutiny.
Since there have been no PTAB proceedings, there is no estoppel landscape established under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2). Therefore, a defendant currently being asserted against by this patent would not be barred from raising any prior art grounds that could have been raised in an IPR or PGR (i.e., novelty under § 102 or obviousness under § 103 based on patents or printed publications for IPR, or broader grounds including § 101 and § 112 for PGR, if timely filed). The absence of PTAB challenges does not indicate a "hardened" patent, but rather one whose validity has not yet been directly challenged in this forum.
Recommended next steps
Since no PTAB activity exists for U.S. Patent No. 11,709,037, a potential defendant facing assertion of this patent might consider filing an Inter Partes Review (IPR). The patent was granted on July 25, 2023, and the nine-month window for filing a Post-Grant Review (PGR) has passed (PGR must be filed on or prior to nine months after the grant of the patent). However, an IPR petition can be filed after the later of nine months after the grant of the patent or the termination of a post-grant review, meaning IPR is available. IPRs allow challenges only on grounds of novelty (§ 102) or obviousness (§ 103) based on patents or printed publications. The absence of PTAB challenges on a patent that is actively litigated suggests an opportunity for a challenger to pursue this avenue, potentially offering a more cost-effective and faster alternative to district court litigation for challenging patent validity.
Generated 5/30/2026, 12:48:44 AM