PTAB challenges

Proceedings overview

One AIA trial proceeding has been filed against US patent 12071391. This proceeding, a Post-Grant Review, was terminated due to settlement. As the proceeding was settled, there is no final determination on the patentability of the claims, meaning all claims remain untested by the PTAB. This gives a defendant no immediate defensive hardening from this specific proceeding.

PGR2025-00043 — Intas Pharmaceuticals, Ltd. et al. v. Atossa Therapeutics, Inc.

• Type: Post-Grant Review
• Filed: 2025-04-03
• Status: Terminated-Settled
• Judge panel: Not publicly available from the provided data.
• Petition grounds: Not publicly available from the provided data.
• Institution decision: Not publicly available from the provided data.
• Final Written Decision (if issued): Not applicable, as the proceeding was terminated due to settlement.
• Settlement / termination: The proceeding was terminated as "Terminated-Settled" on 2026-05-11. The specific terms of the settlement are confidential.
• Appeal: No Federal Circuit appeal on a Final Written Decision, as no FWD was issued.
• Defensive value: This proceeding does not offer any defensive value in terms of claim invalidation or hardening of claims. The settlement means the patentability of the claims was not ultimately decided by the PTAB.

Strategic summary

All claims of US12071391 remain untested by the PTAB, as the single PGR proceeding filed against the patent was terminated due to settlement. Consequently, no claims have been canceled or explicitly sustained through PTAB trial.

Regarding the estoppel landscape, since PGR2025-00043 was terminated via settlement prior to a Final Written Decision, statutory estoppel under 35 U.S.C. § 325(e)(2) for the petitioner (Intas Pharmaceuticals, Ltd. et al.) and their privies would typically not apply to grounds that were not fully litigated to a final decision. This means that, in theory, the prior art grounds raised or that reasonably could have been raised by this petitioner could still be available to other potential defendants. However, the specific terms of the settlement agreement may include contractual estoppel provisions that limit the petitioner's future challenges to the patent.

There is no discernible pattern signal from the single proceeding at this time. The petitioner, Intas Pharmaceuticals, Ltd. et al., has not filed multiple proceedings on this patent, and there is no indication of aggressive pursuit of PTAB appeals by the patent owner or involvement of a defensive aggregator.

Recommended next steps

Since the PGR was settled, no Final Written Decision was issued. Therefore, there is no public FWD to link to or quote for claim invalidation. If you are a defendant facing assertion of US12071391, consider the following:

• Review the patent claims: Analyze the asserted claims of US12071391 independently for potential unpatentability grounds based on prior art that may not have been fully explored due to the settlement.
• Evaluate new PTAB challenge: The absence of an FWD means a new PGR or IPR could be pursued by a different petitioner (or even by the original petitioner if not contractually barred by the settlement), assuming statutory timing requirements are met and new grounds or evidence are presented.
• Monitor for future activity: Keep an eye on the patent's status for any new PTAB filings or litigation that could impact its validity.