PTAB challenges

Proceedings overview

There is one active AIA trial proceeding on file for US patent 12011367. The proceeding is currently in the "Trial Instituted" phase, meaning a trial has been granted on at least some of the challenged claims. This indicates that the patent is under active review by the PTAB, and its claims have not yet been hardened or invalidated.

IPR2026-00162 — Medtronic, Inc. v. Moskowitz Family LLC

• Type: Inter Partes Review
• Filed: 2025-12-02
• Status: Trial Instituted (as of 2026-05-22). This means the PTAB has determined that Medtronic, Inc. has shown a reasonable likelihood that at least one challenged claim of US12011367 is unpatentable, and a trial has begun.
• Judge panel: The PTAB judges assigned to IPR2026-00162 are Vice Chief APJ Kalpana Srinivasan, APJ Beverly D. Green, and APJ Andrew P. Gjonhaug.
• Petition grounds: Medtronic, Inc. challenged claims 1-6, 12-16, 21-25, 30-34, 39-43, and 48-52 of US12011367 as unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) in view of various prior art combinations. Specifically, the petition relied on combinations of U.S. Patent No. 7,704,279 (Moskowitz), U.S. Patent No. 6,808,527 (Bajel), U.S. Patent No. 7,041,137 (Gordon), and U.S. Patent No. 8,114,151 (Gordon).
• Institution decision: The PTAB instituted trial on claims 1-6, 12-16, 21-25, 30-34, 39-43, and 48-52 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) on May 22, 2026. The panel found that the petition demonstrated a reasonable likelihood that these claims are unpatentable as obvious over the asserted prior art combinations.
• Final Written Decision (if issued): Not yet issued. The trial was instituted on 2026-05-22, so the Final Written Decision is due within one year of institution.
• Settlement / termination: Not applicable at this stage.
• Appeal: Not applicable at this stage.
• Defensive value: The institution of trial on claims 1-6, 12-16, 21-25, 30-34, 39-43, and 48-52 means that the patentability of these claims is actively being challenged and could be canceled. For a defendant facing assertion of this patent, this provides a strong basis to argue the potential invalidity of these claims, potentially weakening the patent owner's position.

Strategic summary

Currently, claims 1-6, 12-16, 21-25, 30-34, 39-43, and 48-52 of US12011367 are undergoing an Inter Partes Review (IPR2026-00162) and are thus UNDER REVIEW. The remaining claims (7-11, 17-20, 26-29, 35-38, 44-47, and 53-57) are UNTESTED in the context of this IPR proceeding. No claims have been sustained or canceled by a Final Written Decision yet.

Regarding the estoppel landscape, if IPR2026-00162 proceeds to a Final Written Decision, Medtronic, Inc. (and its privies) would be estopped under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2) from asserting in future District Court or ITC actions that claims 1-6, 12-16, 21-25, 30-34, 39-43, and 48-52 are unpatentable on any ground that Medtronic, Inc. raised or reasonably could have raised during the IPR. For other potential defendants, the asserted prior art combinations (Moskowitz '279, Bajel '527, Gordon '137, and Gordon '151) remain available for use in validity challenges against the patent, especially for claims not challenged or for claims where institution was denied (though institution was granted for all challenged claims here).

In terms of pattern signals, Medtronic, Inc. is a well-known entity in the medical device space and a frequent petitioner in PTAB proceedings. This suggests a strategic challenge from a significant industry player. As of today, this is the only PTAB activity on record for US12011367. The patent owner, Moskowitz Family LLC, has not yet faced a final decision at the PTAB regarding this patent.

Recommended next steps

As IPR2026-00162 is currently in the "Trial Instituted" phase, the primary focus should be on monitoring its progress. The Final Written Decision is due within one year of the institution date (May 22, 2026), meaning it is expected by 2027-05-22. Defendants facing assertion of US12011367 should closely follow the arguments and evidence presented during the IPR, as this will directly impact the patent's strength and the viability of infringement theories based on the challenged claims. It would be prudent to obtain and review the institution decision to understand the PTAB's initial reasoning for instituting the trial.

• Monitor IPR2026-00162: Keep track of all filings, arguments, and potential settlement discussions in IPR2026-00162. The institution decision can be found on the USPTO PTAB Decisions portal.
• Assess impact on infringement theories: If a demand letter or complaint cites claims 1-6, 12-16, 21-25, 30-34, 39-43, or 48-52, the ongoing IPR indicates that the patent owner's ability to enforce these claims is currently in jeopardy.
• Consider intervention or joinder: If your interests align with the petitioner, evaluate the possibility of intervening in the IPR if applicable, or preparing your own challenge leveraging the arguments and art already deemed strong enough for institution.## Proceedings overview
  There is one active AIA trial proceeding on file for US patent 12011367. The proceeding, IPR2026-00162, is currently in the "Trial Instituted" phase, meaning a trial has been granted on at least some of the challenged claims. This indicates that the patent is under active review by the PTAB, and its claims have not yet been hardened or invalidated.

IPR2026-00162 — Medtronic, Inc. v. Moskowitz Family LLC

• Type: Inter Partes Review
• Filed: 2025-12-02
• Status: Trial Instituted (as of 2026-05-22). This means the PTAB has determined that Medtronic, Inc. has shown a reasonable likelihood that at least one challenged claim of US12011367 is unpatentable, and a trial has begun.
• Judge panel: The PTAB judges assigned to IPR2026-00162 are Vice Chief APJ Kalpana Srinivasan, APJ Beverly D. Green, and APJ Andrew P. Gjonhaug.
• Petition grounds: Medtronic, Inc. challenged claims 1-6, 12-16, 21-25, 30-34, 39-43, and 48-52 of US12011367 as unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). Specifically, the petition relied on combinations of U.S. Patent No. 7,704,279 (Moskowitz), U.S. Patent No. 6,808,527 (Bajel), U.S. Patent No. 7,041,137 (Gordon), and U.S. Patent No. 8,114,151 (Gordon).
• Institution decision: The PTAB instituted trial on claims 1-6, 12-16, 21-25, 30-34, 39-43, and 48-52 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) on May 22, 2026. The panel found that the petition demonstrated a reasonable likelihood that these claims are unpatentable as obvious over the asserted prior art combinations.
• Final Written Decision (if issued): Not yet issued. The trial was instituted on 2026-05-22, so the Final Written Decision is due within one year of institution.
• Settlement / termination: Not applicable at this stage.
• Appeal: Not applicable at this stage.
• Defensive value: The institution of trial on claims 1-6, 12-16, 21-25, 30-34, 39-43, and 48-52 means that the patentability of these claims is actively being challenged and could be canceled. For a defendant facing assertion of this patent, this provides a strong basis to argue the potential invalidity of these claims, potentially weakening the patent owner's position.

Strategic summary

Currently, claims 1-6, 12-16, 21-25, 30-34, 39-43, and 48-52 of US12011367 are undergoing an Inter Partes Review (IPR2026-00162) and are thus UNDER REVIEW. The remaining claims (7-11, 17-20, 26-29, 35-38, 44-47, and 53-57) are UNTESTED in the context of this IPR proceeding. No claims have been sustained or canceled by a Final Written Decision yet.

Regarding the estoppel landscape, if IPR2026-00162 proceeds to a Final Written Decision, Medtronic, Inc. (and its privies) would be estopped under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2) from asserting in future District Court or ITC actions that claims 1-6, 12-16, 21-25, 30-34, 39-43, and 48-52 are unpatentable on any ground that Medtronic, Inc. raised or reasonably could have raised during the IPR. For other potential defendants, the asserted prior art combinations (U.S. Patent No. 7,704,279 (Moskowitz), U.S. Patent No. 6,808,527 (Bajel), U.S. Patent No. 7,041,137 (Gordon), and U.S. Patent No. 8,114,151 (Gordon)) remain available for use in validity challenges against the patent, especially for claims not challenged or for claims where institution was denied (though institution was granted for all challenged claims here).

In terms of pattern signals, Medtronic, Inc. is a well-known entity in the medical device space and a frequent petitioner in PTAB proceedings. This suggests a strategic challenge from a significant industry player. As of today, this is the only PTAB activity on record for US12011367. The patent owner, Moskowitz Family LLC, has not yet faced a final decision at the PTAB regarding this patent.

Recommended next steps

As IPR2026-00162 is currently in the "Trial Instituted" phase, the primary focus should be on monitoring its progress. The Final Written Decision is due within one year of the institution date (May 22, 2026), meaning it is expected by 2027-05-22. Defendants facing assertion of US12011367 should closely follow the arguments and evidence presented during the IPR, as this will directly impact the patent's strength and the viability of infringement theories based on the challenged claims. It would be prudent to obtain and review the institution decision to understand the PTAB's initial reasoning for instituting the trial.

• Monitor IPR2026-00162: Keep track of all filings, arguments, and potential settlement discussions in IPR2026-00162. The institution decision can be found by searching for "IPR2026-00162" on the USPTO PTAB Decisions portal.
• Assess impact on infringement theories: If a demand letter or complaint cites claims 1-6, 12-16, 21-25, 30-34, 39-43, or 48-52, the ongoing IPR indicates that the patent owner's ability to enforce these claims is currently in jeopardy.
• Consider intervention or joinder: If your interests align with the petitioner, evaluate the possibility of intervening in the IPR if applicable, or preparing your own challenge leveraging the arguments and art already deemed strong enough for institution.