Patent 9112934
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: Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute (ETRI)
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.
Proceedings overview
There are no AIA trial proceedings on file for U.S. Patent 9,112,934.
Strategic summary
As of May 29, 2026, there are no records of any AIA trial proceedings (Inter Partes Review, Post-Grant Review, or Covered Business Method review) having been filed against U.S. Patent 9,112,934. This means all claims (1-12) of the patent remain untested by the PTAB and are currently considered valid as issued by the USPTO.
The absence of PTAB activity is notable, especially given the patent's active litigation history, as indicated by the infringement suit filed by ETRI against Charter Communications Operating, LLC in 2025. Typically, patents involved in litigation, particularly by entities that actively assert their intellectual property, become targets for AIA challenges.
Recommended next steps
Given the lack of PTAB activity, a defendant facing assertion of U.S. Patent 9,112,934 would need to consider initiating an AIA trial proceeding if they believe strong prior art exists that was not considered by the USPTO examiner. The independent claims (1 and 7) and their dependents would be open to challenge under § 102 (anticipation) or § 103 (obviousness) based on the prior art landscape identified in the patent analysis. Since no proceedings have been filed, there are no estoppel implications under § 315(e)(2) for any potential petitioner.
Generated 5/29/2026, 9:02:02 PM