PTAB challenges

Proceedings overview

US patent 12293691 is currently subject to one active Post-Grant Review (PGR) proceeding. The outcome of this proceeding is pending, meaning no claims have yet been invalidated or sustained by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). Consequently, the patent's defensive posture is still uncertain as it is actively being challenged.

PGR2026-00028 — LG Display Co., Ltd. et al. v. Tianma Microelectronics Co Ltd

• Type: Post-Grant Review
• Filed: 2026-02-06
• Status: Pending (Petition filed, institution decision not yet rendered).
• Judge panel: Not yet public.
• Petition grounds: Details regarding specific claims challenged, prior art asserted, and statutory bases (§ 102 / § 103 / § 112) are not yet publicly available as the petition is still pending review by the PTAB.
• Institution decision: Not yet rendered. The statutory deadline for the PTAB to decide whether to institute the PGR is six months from the petition filing date, which is August 6, 2026.
• Final Written Decision: Not applicable; the petition is currently pending institution.
• Settlement / termination: Not applicable; the petition is currently pending institution.
• Appeal: Not applicable; the petition is currently pending institution.
• Defensive value: This patent is currently facing an active Post-Grant Review challenge. The initiation of a PGR means the patent's validity is under scrutiny at the PTAB, and its future defensive value will largely depend on the outcome of this proceeding. Until an institution decision or Final Written Decision is issued, the strength of the patent's claims against this challenge remains to be determined.

Strategic summary

As of today, May 29, 2026, all claims of US patent 12293691 remain untested by a PTAB Final Written Decision. The single PGR proceeding, PGR2026-00028, is in its early stages, with the institution decision pending. This means no claims have been canceled or confirmed patentable by the PTAB.

The estoppel landscape is currently clear, as no Final Written Decision has been issued. Therefore, the statutory estoppel provisions of § 315(e)(2) do not yet apply. This leaves all potential prior art grounds available for other parties, should they choose to challenge the patent's validity in other forums or through subsequent PTAB proceedings (if permitted). The filing of a PGR by LG Display Co., Ltd. et al. indicates a direct challenge to the patent's validity, but no pattern of multiple filings or aggressive appeals by the patent owner can be observed at this stage.

Recommended next steps

• Monitor the PGR2026-00028 proceeding closely for the institution decision, which is due by 2026-08-06. This decision will reveal which, if any, claims the PTAB has agreed to review based on the petitioner's grounds. The details of the petition grounds, once public upon institution, will be critical for understanding the specific vulnerabilities of the challenged claims.
• The current status of PGR2026-00028 can be tracked via the Unified Patents portal or the USPTO PTAB E2E system.

https://portal.unifiedpatents.com/ptab/case/PGR2026-00028