PTAB challenges

Proceedings overview

One AIA trial proceeding has been filed against US Patent 11929896, which was subsequently terminated due to settlement. As there was no Final Written Decision canceling claims, the patent remains unhardened by a PTAB trial on the merits, and all claims are currently unchallenged by a final Board decision.

IPR2025-01084 — Orca Security Ltd. v. Daniel Hershko SHEMESH et al

• Type: Inter Partes Review
• Filed: 2025-06-04
• Status: Terminated-Settled. This IPR was resolved by the parties through a settlement agreement.
• Judge panel: Information not publicly available in the provided patent text or easy web search for settlement status.
• Petition grounds: Information not publicly available in the provided patent text or easy web search for settlement status. For an IPR, grounds typically allege obviousness (§ 103) and/or anticipation (§ 102) based on prior art.
• Institution decision: Information not publicly available in the provided patent text or easy web search for settlement status. The IPR was likely instituted, or at least the petition was pending institution, prior to settlement.
• Final Written Decision (if issued): Not issued. The proceeding terminated due to settlement before a Final Written Decision could be rendered.
• Settlement / termination: The proceeding was terminated on 2026-01-14 due to settlement. The specific terms of the settlement are typically confidential between the parties.
• Appeal: No appeal to the Federal Circuit as no Final Written Decision was issued.
• Defensive value: This proceeding did not result in any claims of US11929896 being canceled by the PTAB. While the petitioner, Orca Security Ltd., is likely estopped from bringing the same challenges again, this IPR does not weaken the patent for other potential defendants. Any infringement theory built on claims of this patent is still viable from a PTAB-validity perspective.

Strategic summary

All claims of US Patent 11929896 remain UNTESTED by a Final Written Decision from the PTAB. There are no claims that have been CANCELED or SUSTAINED through an IPR trial on the merits. The single IPR filed, IPR2025-01084, was terminated due to a settlement between the petitioner, Orca Security Ltd., and the patent owner. This means the Board did not make a determination on the patentability of any claims in the patent.

The estoppel landscape is limited. Under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(1), Orca Security Ltd. (and any privies) would be estopped from asserting invalidity grounds in district court or the USPTO that it raised or reasonably could have raised during IPR2025-01084. However, for a new defendant, this estoppel does not apply. All prior-art grounds remain available for a new challenger to assert against the patent. There are no discernible pattern signals from this single settled proceeding, such as multiple IPR filings by the same entity or aggressive appeals by the patent owner. The petitioner, Orca Security Ltd., is not typically identified as a defensive aggregator.

Recommended next steps

Since IPR2025-01084 was terminated-settled and no claims were invalidated by the PTAB, there is no Final Written Decision to link to for canceled claims. If you are a defendant facing assertion of this patent, the absence of a PTAB-validated defense means any IPR-based invalidity defense would need to be built from the ground up.

A new defendant could consider filing their own IPR petition against US11929896, as all prior art grounds remain available to them. The patent has not been "hardened" by surviving a full IPR trial.