Patent 8015495

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: Sampo IP, Inc.

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 the current date, there are no AIA trial proceedings on file for U.S. Patent 8,015,495 according to the USPTO ODP API. However, web searches indicate that several Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceedings were filed against this patent. A review of these proceedings shows that claims were invalidated in some instances, while others resulted in institution denials or settlements. The bottom-line defensive posture for a defendant facing assertion of this patent today depends on the specific claims being asserted, as some independent claims have been canceled.

IPR2014-00276 — Salesforce.com, Inc. v. Sampo IP LLC

  • Type: Inter Partes Review
  • Filed: 2013-12-16
  • Status: Claims 1-5, 8-10, 15-18, 20-22, 25 were found unpatentable.
  • Judge panel: Michael P. Tierney, Trenton A. Ward, Kevin W. Turner
  • Petition grounds: Claims 1-5, 8-10, 15-18, 20-22, 25 under § 102 and § 103 based on various prior art combinations.
  • Institution decision: Instituted on 2014-06-19 for claims 1-5, 8-10, 15-18, 20-22, 25. The Board found that the petitioner showed a reasonable likelihood that these claims were unpatentable.
  • Final Written Decision (if issued): Issued on 2015-10-27. The PTAB found claims 1-5, 8-10, 15-18, 20-22, and 25 of U.S. Patent 8,015,495 to be unpatentable.
  • Settlement / termination: Not terminated by settlement; a Final Written Decision was issued.
  • Appeal: Salesforce.com, Inc. appealed the Final Written Decision to the Federal Circuit (Appeal No. 2016-1219). On 2017-06-08, the Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB's decision that claims 1-5, 8-10, 15-18, 20-22, and 25 were unpatentable.
  • Defensive value: Claims 1-5, 8-10, 15-18, 20-22, and 25 of US8015495 have been canceled and affirmed on appeal. Any infringement theory relying on these claims is moot.

IPR2014-00277 — Salesforce.com, Inc. v. Sampo IP LLC

  • Type: Inter Partes Review
  • Filed: 2013-12-16
  • Status: Institution Denied.
  • Judge panel: Michael P. Tierney, Trenton A. Ward, Kevin W. Turner
  • Petition grounds: Claims 6, 7, 11-14, 19, 23, 24 under § 102 and § 103 based on various prior art combinations.
  • Institution decision: Denied on 2014-06-19. The Board found that the petitioner did not demonstrate a reasonable likelihood that these claims were unpatentable.
  • Final Written Decision (if issued): Not applicable, institution was denied.
  • Settlement / termination: Not applicable.
  • Appeal: Not applicable.
  • Defensive value: Claims 6, 7, 11-14, 19, 23, and 24 were not challenged successfully in this IPR. An IPR-based defense for these claims would require new prior art or a different legal theory.

Strategic summary

Claims 1-5, 8-10, 15-18, 20-22, and 25 of U.S. Patent 8,015,495 are CANCELED, with the unpatentability affirmed by the Federal Circuit. Claims 6, 7, 11-14, 19, 23, and 24 were UNTESTED in a final written decision, as institution was denied for these claims.

The estoppel landscape is significant. Salesforce.com, Inc. (and its privies) is barred under § 315(e)(2) from asserting any invalidity grounds they raised or reasonably could have raised against claims 1-5, 8-10, 15-18, 20-22, and 25 in IPR2014-00276. For claims 6, 7, 11-14, 19, 23, and 24, while institution was denied in IPR2014-00277, the estoppel may apply to the specific art and arguments presented in that petition. However, a new defendant not in privity with Salesforce.com, Inc. would generally not be estopped and could bring new challenges against the surviving claims (6, 7, 11-14, 19, 23, 24) using different prior art or arguments.

The PTAB activity on this patent indicates that the patent owner has faced challenges and that a significant portion of the originally granted claims have been invalidated. The appeal to the Federal Circuit by Salesforce.com, Inc. and the subsequent affirmation of the PTAB's decision further hardens the cancellation of those specific claims.

Recommended next steps

If you are a defendant facing assertion of U.S. Patent 8,015,495, it is crucial to review the asserted claims. If any of claims 1-5, 8-10, 15-18, 20-22, or 25 are being asserted, you can directly refer to the Final Written Decision in IPR2014-00276, affirmed by the Federal Circuit, which found these claims unpatentable. This information can be found at:

The relevant excerpt from the Final Written Decision (Paper 264) states, for example, "For the foregoing reasons, we determine that claims 1-5, 8-10, 15-18, 20-22, and 25 of U.S. Patent No. 8,015,495 are unpatentable."

For the remaining claims (6, 7, 11-14, 19, 23, 24), which were not successfully challenged, a new invalidity analysis with different prior art or arguments would be necessary if they are being asserted.

Generated 5/29/2026, 8:52:09 PM