PTAB challenges

Proceedings overview

There is one active Post-Grant Review (PGR) proceeding, PGR2026-00023, filed against US patent 12370716. The proceeding is currently in the pre-institution phase. As no claims have been challenged or invalidated yet, the patent's defensive posture for a defendant remains unchanged, but a potential challenge is underway.

PGR2026-00023 — Viance, LLC v. Koppers Performance Chemicals Inc

• Type: Post-Grant Review (PGR) [cite: Original Patent Text]
• Filed: 2026-03-17 [cite: Original Patent Text]
• Status: Pending. The proceeding has been filed and is awaiting a decision on institution by the PTAB. [cite: Original Patent Text]
• Judge panel: Not publicly available at this pre-institution stage.
• Petition grounds: Details regarding specific claims, prior art, or statutory bases (§ 102 / § 103 / § 112) are not yet publicly available in the provided patent text or readily accessible from the PTAB portal at this early stage.
• Institution decision: Not yet issued. The PTAB has a statutory deadline of 6 months from the petition filing date (September 17, 2026) to decide whether to institute the PGR.
• Final Written Decision: Not applicable, as the proceeding has not yet reached the institution phase.
• Settlement / termination: Not applicable.
• Appeal: Not applicable.
• Defensive value: This active PGR indicates that the patent's validity is currently being challenged. While no claims have been affected yet, a defendant facing assertion of this patent should monitor this proceeding closely, as institution could signal a credible challenge to at least some claims.

Strategic summary

Currently, all claims of US patent 12370716 remain UNTESTED by a final PTAB decision. The single PGR proceeding, PGR2026-00023, filed by Viance, LLC against patent owner Koppers Performance Chemicals Inc., is in its early stages, with the institution decision pending. Therefore, there are no claims that have been canceled or sustained through an AIA trial.

The estoppel landscape under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2) is not yet relevant, as no Final Written Decision has been issued. If the PGR is instituted, Viance, LLC (and its privies) would be estopped from raising grounds that were raised or reasonably could have been raised in the PGR, should a Final Written Decision ultimately issue. For other potential defendants, all prior-art grounds remain available until a Final Written Decision is issued against the patent. There are no apparent patterns of multiple filings by the same petitioner or aggressive PTAB appeals by the patent owner at this time, given only one pending proceeding. The petitioner, Viance, LLC, is a known entity in the wood preservation industry.

Recommended next steps

• Monitor PGR2026-00023: A defendant facing assertion of this patent should closely track PGR2026-00023. The most critical near-term milestone is the institution decision deadline, which is September 17, 2026.
• Review Petition: Once the petition for PGR2026-00023 becomes fully public (if not already), obtain and thoroughly review it to understand the specific claims being challenged, the asserted prior art, and the statutory grounds for unpatentability. This information will be crucial for assessing the strength of the challenge.
• Anticipate Institution Decision: The outcome of the institution decision will significantly impact the patent's defensive value. If instituted, it suggests the PTAB believes there's a reasonable likelihood of unpatentability for at least one challenged claim.
• No PTAB Activity Concluded: Given the absence of any concluded PTAB activity, the patent currently retains its full scope as granted for all claims. Any infringement theories citing this patent are based on its claims as issued.
• Access PTAB Portal: Continuously check the USPTO PTAB End-to-End (E2E) system for updates on PGR2026-00023, including the petition, patent owner preliminary response, and the eventual institution decision.