Patent 9132311
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.
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
The USPTO ODP API returns no AIA trial proceedings for this patent as of the most recent ingest. A web search also did not reveal any PTAB activity. Therefore, there are no PTAB proceedings on file for US Patent 9,132,311. This means the patent's claims remain untested by AIA trial proceedings, and a defendant would need to initiate new challenges if pursuing a PTAB-based defense.
Strategic summary
As there are no PTAB proceedings on file for US Patent 9,132,311, all claims of the patent remain untested by these particular administrative challenges. This means that a potential defendant facing assertion of this patent would not be subject to any estoppel under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2) based on prior AIA trials. All prior-art grounds, whether previously known or newly discovered, would be available for a new PTAB petition.
The absence of PTAB activity can be interpreted in various ways. It could indicate that the patent has not been extensively asserted, or that prior assertions have been settled before reaching the PTAB stage. Alternatively, it might suggest that the prior art landscape is not perceived as strong enough to warrant an IPR, PGR, or CBM challenge. For a patent owner, the lack of PTAB challenges means the patent has not been subjected to the scrutiny of an AIA trial, which can be seen as both a potential vulnerability (if strong prior art exists) and an advantage (if the patent is robust).
Recommended next steps
Since no PTAB activity exists for US Patent 9,132,311, any defendant facing assertion of this patent would have the full range of PTAB trial options available. This includes filing an Inter Partes Review (IPR), Post-Grant Review (PGR), or Covered Business Method (CBM) review, depending on the nature of the claims and the timing relative to the patent's issue date. The absence of prior PTAB challenges means that a defendant would need to conduct thorough prior art searching and analysis to build a strong petition, without the benefit of previous PTAB decisions to guide their strategy.
Generated 5/29/2026, 5:56:36 PM