Patent 8966347
Litigation summary
Past and pending lawsuits — plaintiffs, defendants, jurisdictions, outcomes, and notable rulings.
Active provider: Google · gemini-2.5-flash
No PTAB proceedings on file. This patent has not been challenged through Inter Partes Review, Post-Grant Review, or Covered Business Method review at the USPTO. The absence is itself a signal — well-asserted patents eventually attract IPRs.
Cases on file (3)
Group view →Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 8966347. The free-form analysis below may also discuss cases beyond this list.
- Western Digital Technologies, Inc. et al. v. Viasat, Inc.filed Aug 2, 2022IPR2022-01171Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)Final Written Decision
Defendants: Viasat, Inc.
- Viasat, Inc. v. Western Digital Corporation et al.filed Dec 10, 20216:21-cv-01230-ADAUnited States District Court for the Western District of TexasOngoing
Defendants: Western Digital Corporation et al.
- 24-1483U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal CircuitMandamus petition denied
Defendants: Viasat, Inc.
Litigation summary
Past and pending lawsuits — plaintiffs, defendants, jurisdictions, outcomes, and notable rulings.
Known litigation involving US patent 8966347 includes:
1. Inter Partes Review (IPR) before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)
- Plaintiff(s): Western Digital Technologies, Inc., Western Digital Corporation, and SanDisk LLC [cite: US8966347B2]
- Defendant(s): Viasat, Inc.
- Jurisdiction: Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)
- Case Number: IPR2022-01171 [cite: US8966347B2]
- Filing Date: August 2, 2022 [cite: US8966347B2]
- Outcome/Current Status: Final Written Decision [cite: US8966347B2].
2. District Court Litigation
- Plaintiff(s): Viasat, Inc.
- Defendant(s): Western Digital Corporation et al.
- Jurisdiction: United States District Court for the Western District of Texas
- Case Number: 6:21-cv-01230-ADA
- Filing Date: December 10, 2021
- Outcome/Current Status: The District Court denied Western Digital's motion to transfer the case to the Northern District of California on December 19, 2022. The case appears to be ongoing.
3. Appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC)
- Plaintiff(s)/Petitioner(s): Western Digital Technologies, Inc.
- Defendant(s)/Respondent(s): Viasat, Inc.
- Jurisdiction: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit [cite: US8966347B2, 4]
- Case Number: 24-1483 [cite: US8966347B2]
- Filing Date: Prior to March 6, 2023 (date of the CAFC order reviewing the petition).
- Outcome/Current Status: Western Digital Technologies, Inc. filed a petition for a writ of mandamus seeking to compel the District Court for the Western District of Texas to vacate its denial of transfer and transfer the case to the Northern District of California. The CAFC reviewed the petition, with the court concluding that Western Digital had failed to show that the Northern District of California was clearly more convenient, implying the mandamus petition was denied.
Generated 6/26/2026, 12:47:06 AM