Patent 12417756
Litigation summary
Past and pending lawsuits — plaintiffs, defendants, jurisdictions, outcomes, and notable rulings.
Active provider: Google · gemini-2.5-pro
PTAB activity (1)
AIA trial proceedings — IPR, PGR, CBM — filed at the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board against this patent. Sourced directly from the PTAB Trial API.
- PGR2026-00033PGRfiled Mar 30, 2026vs. Krisp Technologies, Inc.Pending
Cached for 24 hours. Status strings are sourced verbatim from the PTAB API; the colored badge is our heuristic classification.
Cases on file (2)
Group view →Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 12417756. The free-form analysis below may also discuss cases beyond this list.
- Krisp Technologies, Inc. v. Sanas.AI Inc.filed Mar 30, 2026PGR2026-00033USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)Pending
Defendants: Sanas.AI Inc.
- Sanas.AI Inc. v. Krisp Technologies, Inc.filed Jul 7, 20253:25-cv-05666U.S. District Court for the Northern District of CaliforniaOngoing
Defendants: Krisp Technologies, Inc.
Litigation summary
Past and pending lawsuits — plaintiffs, defendants, jurisdictions, outcomes, and notable rulings.
Litigation and Administrative Challenges involving US Patent 12,417,756
As of April 30, 2026, U.S. Patent 12,417,756 is involved in one known district court litigation and one administrative challenge before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).
District Court Litigation
Case: Sanas.AI Inc. v. Krisp Technologies, Inc.
- Plaintiff: Sanas.AI Inc.
- Defendant: Krisp Technologies, Inc.
- Jurisdiction: U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
- Case Number: 3:25-cv-05666
- Filing Date: July 7, 2025
- Status: The case is ongoing. On September 23, 2025, Sanas amended its original complaint to include infringement claims regarding U.S. Patent 12,417,756, which had been recently issued. The original complaint alleged theft of confidential information and infringement of other patents. According to a statement from Sanas, the court denied a motion from Krisp Technologies that attempted to invalidate Sanas's patents.
PTAB Administrative Challenge
In addition to the district court case, the patent is subject to a Post-Grant Review (PGR) proceeding, which challenges the patent's validity.
Case: PGR2026-00033
- Petitioner: Krisp Technologies, Inc.
- Patent Owner: Sanas.AI Inc.
- Jurisdiction: USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)
- Filing Date: March 30, 2026
- Status: Pending. A PGR is a trial proceeding conducted at the PTAB to review the patentability of one or more claims in a patent.
Generated 4/30/2026, 4:30:37 PM