Patent 12423718

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 (0)

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: Alpha Modus Corp

No PTAB proceedings on file. This patent has not been challenged via IPR, PGR, or CBM. The absence is itself a signal — well-asserted patents eventually attract IPRs. The LLM analysis below may surface filings the ODP feed hasn’t indexed yet.

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.

✓ Generated

Proceedings overview

As of May 31, 2026, there are no AIA trial proceedings (Inter Partes Review, Post-Grant Review, or Covered Business Method review) on file for US patent 12,423,718 with the USPTO Open Data Portal. Web searches also did not surface any publicly available PTAB proceedings for this patent. This indicates that the patent is currently untested by AIA trials.

No PTAB Activity on File

  • Type: N/A
  • Filed: N/A
  • Status: No AIA trial proceedings have been filed against US Patent 12,423,718.
  • Judge panel: N/A
  • Petition grounds: N/A
  • Institution decision: N/A
  • Final Written Decision: N/A
  • Settlement / termination: N/A
  • Appeal: N/A
  • Defensive value: The absence of PTAB challenges means that all claims of US patent 12,423,718 currently stand as issued and have not been subjected to a third-party validity review before the PTAB.

Strategic summary

Currently, all claims of US patent 12,423,718 are UNTESTED by PTAB proceedings. No claims have been canceled, sustained, or narrowed through an IPR, PGR, or CBM. This means the patent has not yet been subjected to the scrutiny of an AIA trial before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.

Since no PTAB proceedings have been filed, there is no estoppel landscape to consider under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2). All potential prior-art grounds remain available for a future petitioner to raise in an AIA trial, subject to the statutory filing windows. For a defendant currently being asserted against, this means that any prior art that could be used to challenge the patent's validity (e.g., under § 102 or § 103) is still a viable basis for a PTAB petition.

Given the patent's publication date of September 23, 2025, the 9-month window for filing a Post-Grant Review (PGR) petition (which allows for challenges under §§ 101, 102, 103, and 112) is still open until approximately June 23, 2026. After this date, only Inter Partes Review (IPR) petitions (which are limited to challenges under §§ 102 and 103 based on patents and printed publications) would be available, typically after the 9-month PGR window closes. The ongoing litigation noted in the patent's history suggests that defendants in those cases may consider filing PTAB petitions as a defensive strategy.

Recommended next steps

Given the current lack of PTAB activity for US patent 12,423,718:

  • For a potential defendant: If facing assertion of this patent, consider the strategic timing for filing an AIA trial petition. The patent is still within its Post-Grant Review (PGR) window, which closes around June 23, 2026. A PGR offers broader grounds for challenge (§§ 101, 102, 103, and 112) compared to an IPR (§§ 102 and 103 only). This narrow window presents a unique opportunity for a comprehensive challenge.
  • For any interested party: The absence of PTAB activity for a patent involved in active district court litigation is a notable signal. It suggests that, as of today, no party has successfully (or even attempted to) use the PTAB system to challenge the patent's validity. This makes the patent "hardened" only in the sense that it has yet to be challenged, not that it has survived any third-party review.
  • Monitor for future filings: Given the ongoing litigation, it is advisable to regularly monitor the USPTO's Patent Trial and Appeal Board End-to-End (E2E) system for any newly filed IPR or PGR petitions concerning US patent 12,423,718.## Proceedings overview

As of May 31, 2026, there are no AIA trial proceedings (Inter Partes Review, Post-Grant Review, or Covered Business Method review) on file for US patent 12,423,718 with the USPTO Open Data Portal. Web searches also did not surface any publicly available PTAB proceedings for this patent. This indicates that the patent is currently untested by AIA trials, giving a defendant a clear defensive posture as no claims have been challenged or invalidated at the PTAB.

No PTAB Activity on File

  • Type: N/A
  • Filed: N/A
  • Status: No AIA trial proceedings have been filed against US Patent 12,423,718.
  • Judge panel: N/A
  • Petition grounds: N/A
  • Institution decision: N/A
  • Final Written Decision: N/A
  • Settlement / termination: N/A
  • Appeal: N/A
  • Defensive value: The absence of PTAB challenges means that all claims of US patent 12,423,718 currently stand as issued and have not been subjected to a third-party validity review before the PTAB. Any infringement theory built on these claims remains formally unchallenged through this avenue.

Strategic summary

Currently, all claims of US patent 12,423,718 are UNTESTED by PTAB proceedings. No claims have been canceled, sustained, or narrowed through an IPR, PGR, or CBM. This means the patent has not yet been subjected to the scrutiny of an AIA trial before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.

Since no PTAB proceedings have been filed, there is no estoppel landscape to consider under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2). All potential prior-art grounds remain available for a future petitioner to raise in an AIA trial, subject to the statutory filing windows. For a defendant currently being asserted against, this means that any prior art that could be used to challenge the patent's validity (e.g., under § 102 or § 103) is still a viable basis for a PTAB petition.

Given the patent's publication date of September 23, 2025, the 9-month window for filing a Post-Grant Review (PGR) petition (which allows for challenges under §§ 101, 102, 103, and 112) is still open until approximately June 23, 2026. After this date, only Inter Partes Review (IPR) petitions (which are limited to challenges under §§ 102 and 103 based on patents and printed publications) would be available, typically after the 9-month PGR window closes. The ongoing litigation noted in the patent's history suggests that defendants in those cases may consider filing PTAB petitions as a defensive strategy.

Recommended next steps

Given the current lack of PTAB activity for US patent 12,423,718:

  • For a potential defendant: If facing assertion of this patent, consider the strategic timing for filing an AIA trial petition. The patent is still within its Post-Grant Review (PGR) window, which closes around June 23, 2026. A PGR offers broader grounds for challenge (§§ 101, 102, 103, and 112) compared to an IPR (§§ 102 and 103 only). This narrow window presents a unique opportunity for a comprehensive challenge.
  • Monitor for future filings: Given the ongoing litigation, it is advisable to regularly monitor the USPTO's Patent Trial and Appeal Board End-to-End (E2E) system for any newly filed IPR or PGR petitions concerning US patent 12,423,718. The absence of PTAB activity for a patent involved in active district court litigation is a notable signal, suggesting that no party has yet formally challenged its validity before the Board.

Generated 5/31/2026, 12:47:47 AM