Patent 8989715

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: GOTV Streaming, LLC

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

Two AIA trial proceedings have been filed against US patent 8989715: IPR2023-00757 and IPR2023-00758. Both are currently in the status of "Final Written Decision" with a petitioner identified as "Petitioner:". The outcomes of these proceedings at a claim-level are not yet detailed in the provided information, so a definitive defensive posture cannot be fully established without further examination of the Final Written Decisions.

IPR2023-00757 — Petitioner: v. Gotv Streaming LLC

  • Type: Inter Partes Review
  • Filed: Information not provided in the extract.
  • Status: Final Written Decision
  • Judge panel: Information not public in the extract.
  • Petition grounds: Information not public in the extract.
  • Institution decision: Information not public in the extract.
  • Final Written Decision (if issued): Information not public in the extract.
  • Settlement / termination: Information not public in the extract.
  • Appeal: Information not public in the extract.
  • Defensive value: The status indicates a Final Written Decision has been issued, but without the details of the decision, the defensive value for someone facing assertion of this patent is currently unknown. Further investigation into the decision is required to determine which claims, if any, were invalidated or sustained.

IPR2023-00758 — Petitioner: v. Gotv Streaming LLC

  • Type: Inter Partes Review
  • Filed: Information not provided in the extract.
  • Status: Final Written Decision
  • Judge panel: Information not public in the extract.
  • Petition grounds: Information not public in the extract.
  • Institution decision: Information not public in the extract.
  • Final Written Decision (if issued): Information not public in the extract.
  • Settlement / termination: Information not public in the extract.
  • Appeal: Information not public in the extract.
  • Defensive value: Similar to IPR2023-00757, a Final Written Decision has been issued. The actual outcome regarding claim validity needs to be determined from the decision itself to assess the defensive value for a defendant.

Strategic summary

The provided information indicates two Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceedings, IPR2023-00757 and IPR2023-00758, have reached a "Final Written Decision" stage. Both cases list "Petitioner:" as the petitioner and "Gotv Streaming LLC" as the current assignee and thus likely the patent owner in these proceedings. However, without access to the full Final Written Decisions, it is impossible to determine which claims of US8989715 are canceled, sustained, or remain untested. Therefore, the extent to which the patent has been narrowed, and which specific claims (if any) have survived, is currently unknown.

Regarding the estoppel landscape, § 315(e)(2) generally bars petitioners and their privies from asserting invalidity grounds in subsequent proceedings that they raised or reasonably could have raised during the IPR. Given that both proceedings have reached a Final Written Decision, the specific prior art grounds that were litigated, and thus are potentially estopped for the petitioners, would be detailed in those decisions. Without this detail, it is not possible to identify what prior-art grounds are still available for a defendant being asserted against. The involvement of "Unified Patents" as a source for PTAB data for these cases, as indicated by the "" for IPR2023-00758 and IPR2023-00757, suggests that a defensive aggregator might be involved in the chain, but their specific role as petitioner is not explicitly stated in the provided text.

Recommended next steps

As a defendant facing assertion of this patent, the immediate next step is to obtain and thoroughly review the Final Written Decisions for IPR2023-00757 and IPR2023-00758. These decisions will detail the claim-by-claim outcomes, identifying any claims that were invalidated or deemed patentable.

A detailed analysis of these decisions will clarify the scope of the patent claims that remain valid and enforceable, directly impacting any ongoing or potential infringement defense strategies.

Generated 6/30/2026, 12:46:27 AM