- Filed
- Feb 11, 2026
- Last modified
- Jun 2, 2026
- Petitioner
- Apple Inc.
- Inventor
- Thomas A. Howell et al
Patent 12044901
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 (2)
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: IngenioSpec LLC
- Filed
- Sep 19, 2025
- Last modified
- Nov 18, 2025
- Petitioner
- Bose Corporation
- Inventor
- Thomas A. Howell et al
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 two AIA trial proceedings on file for US patent 12044901. One proceeding (IPR2025-01550) has been Terminated-Settled, and one proceeding (IPR2026-00253) is currently Pending. This mixed outcome means the patent owner, Ingeniospec LLC, has actively litigated the patent. For a defendant, the pending IPR presents a potential avenue for invalidating claims, while the settled IPR suggests the patent owner was willing to resolve disputes outside of a full trial.
IPR2025-01550 — Bose Corporation v. Ingeniospec LLC
- Type: Inter Partes Review
- Filed: 2025-09-19
- Status: Terminated-Settled. The proceeding concluded due to a settlement between the parties.
- Judge panel: Information regarding the judge panel for this terminated proceeding is not publicly available in the provided sources.
- Petition grounds: Details on the specific claims challenged and prior art asserted by Bose Corporation are not publicly disclosed in the provided information.
- Institution decision: The outcome of the institution decision is not explicitly stated in the provided information, but the proceeding was terminated due to settlement, which typically occurs before or shortly after institution.
- Final Written Decision: Not issued, as the proceeding was terminated-settled.
- Settlement / termination: The proceeding was terminated-settled on 2025-11-18. The specific terms of the settlement are confidential.
- Appeal: No appeal to the Federal Circuit was filed, as the case was settled.
- Defensive value: While the specifics of the challenge are unknown, the settlement indicates that Bose Corporation and Ingeniospec LLC reached an agreement, preventing a final decision on patentability. This means no claims were formally invalidated or definitively sustained by the PTAB in this proceeding. For a new defendant, this IPR does not offer direct claim cancellation, but it signals that the patent owner has previously negotiated settlements related to this patent.
IPR2026-00253 — [Apple Inc.](/litigations/by-plaintiff/Apple%20Inc.) v. Ingeniospec LLC
- Type: Inter Partes Review
- Filed: 2026-02-11
- Status: Pending. This proceeding is active and has not yet reached a final decision.
- Judge panel: Information regarding the judge panel for this pending proceeding is not publicly available in the provided sources.
- Petition grounds: Details on the specific claims challenged and prior art asserted by Apple Inc. are not publicly disclosed in the provided information.
- Institution decision: The institution decision for this proceeding has not yet been issued.
- Final Written Decision: Not issued, as the proceeding is pending.
- Settlement / termination: Not applicable at this stage.
- Appeal: Not applicable at this stage.
- Defensive value: This is an active challenge against the patent. The outcome of the institution decision, expected within a few months of the filing date, will be critical. If instituted, it could lead to the cancellation of challenged claims. If institution is denied, it would strengthen the patent's validity against the specific grounds raised by Apple Inc.
Strategic summary
Currently, no claims of US12044901 have been formally CANCELED by a Final Written Decision from the PTAB. The first IPR (IPR2025-01550 filed by Bose Corporation) was Terminated-Settled, meaning no judicial determination of patentability was made. All claims of the patent therefore remain SUSTAINED by prior PTAB action or, more accurately, UNTESTED by a final merits decision. The second IPR (IPR2026-00253 filed by Apple Inc.) is currently Pending, with the institution decision yet to be rendered. Therefore, the patent has not yet been "hardened" by surviving an IPR to a Final Written Decision, nor have any claims been invalidated.
Regarding the estoppel landscape, § 315(e)(2) estoppel applies to petitioners (and their privies) for any ground that was raised or reasonably could have been raised during an IPR that resulted in a Final Written Decision. Since IPR2025-01550 was settled and did not result in a Final Written Decision, neither Bose Corporation nor its privies would be estopped under this provision by that proceeding. For IPR2026-00253, as it is still pending and has not reached institution, no estoppel has yet arisen. This means that a new defendant currently being asserted against would theoretically have all prior-art grounds still available, provided they are not in privity with either Bose or Apple in a way that would trigger equitable estoppel or other preclusion doctrines.
A pattern signal is the involvement of major technology companies (Bose and Apple) challenging the patent. The settlement with Bose indicates that Ingeniospec LLC is willing to settle, which could be an important data point for future defendants. The fact that Apple Inc. has filed a subsequent IPR also suggests continued concerns about the patent's validity or scope. The public record does not yet show aggressive PTAB appeals by the patent owner, nor is there explicit information about a defensive aggregator like Unified Patents being in the chain for these specific proceedings. However, Unified Patents does track litigation for this patent, as indicated by the "Family has litigation" section on Google Patents.
Recommended next steps
Since IPR2026-00253 is pending, a defendant facing assertion of this patent should closely monitor its progress. The key near-term milestone for IPR2026-00253 will be the institution decision deadline. Under 35 U.S.C. § 314(b), the PTAB typically issues a decision on institution within six months of the petition's filing date. For IPR2026-00253, filed on 2026-02-11, the institution decision would be expected around 2026-08-11. A favorable institution decision would open up the possibility of claims being cancelled, which could significantly impact any ongoing or threatened litigation.
If the institution decision is favorable (i.e., the PTAB institutes the IPR), the one-year statutory trial deadline would commence, and a Final Written Decision would be expected approximately one year from the institution date.
Generated 5/29/2026, 12:46:54 AM