Patent 11716171B2

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.

✓ Generated

Proceedings overview

There is one AIA trial proceeding on file for US patent 11716171B2, which is currently active and instituted. This indicates that the patent has been challenged, and the PTAB has found sufficient grounds to proceed to a full review of the challenged claims.

IPR2025-01110 — Unified Patents v. Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc

  • Type: Inter Partes Review
  • Filed: Specific filing date is not publicly available in the provided search results but is generally found on the Unified Patents portal or USPTO PTAB E2E system.
  • Status: Pending - Instituted [cite: https://portal.unifiedpatents.com/ptab/case/IPR2025-01110]
  • Judge panel: The specific judge panel information is not publicly available in the provided search results.
  • Petition grounds: The specific claims challenged, prior art, and statutory basis (§ 102 / § 103 / § 112) are not publicly available in the provided search results. This information would typically be detailed in the petition and institution decision, which are available on the Unified Patents portal or USPTO PTAB E2E system.
  • Institution decision: Instituted. [cite: https://portal.unifiedpatents.com/ptab/case/IPR2025-01110] The date and the panel's reasoning for institution are not publicly available in the provided search results.
  • Final Written Decision: Not yet issued, as the proceeding is currently "Pending - Instituted" [cite: https://portal.unifiedpatents.com/ptab/case/IPR2025-01110].
  • Settlement / termination: Not applicable at this stage.
  • Appeal: Not applicable at this stage.
  • Defensive value: This active IPR means that the patentability of some claims of US11716171B2 is currently under review by the PTAB. A defendant facing assertion of this patent should closely monitor this proceeding, as an unfavorable outcome for the patent owner could significantly weaken any infringement claims. The fact that the IPR was instituted suggests that the petitioner presented a sufficiently strong case of unpatentability.

Strategic summary

As of the current date, US patent 11716171B2 has one active Inter Partes Review, IPR2025-01110, initiated by Unified Patents. This proceeding has been instituted, meaning the PTAB has determined that there is a reasonable likelihood that the petitioner would prevail with respect to at least one challenged claim. The specific claims under review, the prior art cited, and the statutory grounds for the challenge are not detailed in the provided information. Therefore, it is currently unknown which claims are potentially at risk of being canceled or which remain untested.

The presence of Unified Patents as the petitioner is a significant signal. Unified Patents is a defensive aggregator that proactively challenges patents they deem problematic, often on behalf of their members. Their involvement suggests a strategic effort to invalidate patents that may be asserted against a broader industry. The patent owner, Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc, is currently defending its patent against this challenge. The institution of the IPR indicates that the PTAB found the petition to be of sufficient merit to proceed to trial.

Recommended next steps

  • Monitor IPR2025-01110 closely: As a defendant, it is critical to track the progress of IPR2025-01110. Key upcoming milestones include the oral hearing (if scheduled) and the Final Written Decision (FWD), which is typically due within one year of institution.
  • Access full proceeding details: Obtain the full petition and institution decision for IPR2025-01110 from the Unified Patents portal [cite: https://portal.unifiedpatents.com/ptab/case/IPR2025-01110] or the USPTO's Patent Trial and Appeal Board End-to-End (PTAB E2E) system. This will provide essential details on the challenged claims, prior art references, and the PTAB's initial reasoning for institution.
  • Evaluate challenged claims: Once the challenged claims are known, assess your potential infringement exposure in light of these claims. If your product/service infringes only claims that are under review, the outcome of the IPR will be highly relevant.
  • Assess estoppel implications: If considering filing your own IPR, understanding the grounds raised in IPR2025-01110 is crucial to avoid estoppel under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2), which bars petitioners (and their privies) from raising any ground they raised or reasonably could have raised.

Generated 5/17/2026, 12:45:55 PM