PTAB challenges

Proceedings overview

One AIA trial proceeding has been filed against US patent 11850424. This proceeding, IPR2026-00092, received a discretionary denial of institution. This means no claims of the patent have been challenged on the merits or invalidated by the PTAB. This gives a defendant a posture where the patent's claims remain untested by an AIA trial on the merits.

IPR2026-00092 — Nyxoah, Inc. et al. v. Inspire Medical Systems Inc

• Type: Inter Partes Review
• Filed: 2025-12-18
• Status: Discretionary Denial. The PTAB declined to institute the inter partes review, meaning the trial on the merits did not proceed.
• Judge panel: I do not have information on the specific judge panel for IPR2026-00092.
• Petition grounds: I do not have the specifics of which claims, art, and statutory basis (§ 102 / § 103 / § 112) were alleged in the petition for IPR2026-00092.
• Institution decision: Denied. The petition for IPR2026-00092 was subject to a discretionary denial, with the last modification date being 2026-05-19. A discretionary denial typically means the PTAB chose not to institute the trial for reasons other than the merits of the prior art challenge, such as concurrent litigation, inefficient use of resources, or other factors under Fintiv or NHK-Fintiv considerations. I lack the specific reasoning from the denial order.
• Final Written Decision: Not applicable, as institution was denied.
• Settlement / termination: No settlement or termination information is publicly available for IPR2026-00092, as institution was denied.
• Appeal: Not applicable, as institution was denied.
• Defensive value: Since the petition for IPR2026-00092 was denied institution, the claims of US11850424 have not been subjected to a substantive review by the PTAB. This means that an IPR-based defense using similar grounds might face similar discretionary denial challenges if the underlying circumstances for the denial (e.g., parallel litigation) persist. However, the claims themselves remain patentable as far as the PTAB is concerned, as no trial was instituted.

Strategic summary

All claims of US11850424 remain UNTESTED by a final PTAB decision. The single IPR proceeding, IPR2026-00092, was denied institution on a discretionary basis, meaning the PTAB did not reach the merits of the patentability challenge. Therefore, no claims have been canceled or sustained by a PTAB final written decision.

The estoppel landscape for US11850424 is currently clear regarding IPR2026-00092. Since institution was denied, statutory estoppel under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2) does not apply to the petitioner (Nyxoah, Inc. et al.) or their privies for any grounds that were raised or reasonably could have been raised in that specific IPR. This implies that other defendants, and potentially even the same petitioner under different circumstances or with different legal strategies, are not barred from bringing new challenges based on prior art.

There are no clear pattern signals from this single proceeding, other than the patent owner, Inspire Medical Systems Inc., successfully avoiding IPR institution in this instance. The status of "Discretionary Denial" suggests that procedural or policy considerations, rather than the strength of the patent claims or the prior art, were the primary reason the IPR did not proceed to trial.

Recommended next steps

The PTAB proceeding IPR2026-00092 is currently in a "Discretionary Denial" status, with the last modification on 2026-05-19. While the petition was denied, it's advisable to obtain the full denial order to understand the specific reasoning for the discretionary denial, especially if considering a future PTAB challenge. This information would be available through the USPTO PTAB End-to-End system. Understanding the basis for denial (e.g., parallel district court litigation, timing relative to trial) is critical for assessing the likelihood of success for any new IPR petitions against this patent.