PTAB challenges

Proceedings overview

One AIA trial proceeding has been filed against US Patent 9202191, with a Final Written Decision issued. The outcome resulted in claims 1, 11, and 14 being found unpatentable. This provides a strong defensive posture for a defendant, as the primary independent claims have been canceled.

IPR2022-01359 — Unified Patents, LLC v. Consumeron LLC

• Type: Inter Partes Review
• Filed: The filing date of the petition would precede the PTAB case number's year (2022). A more precise filing date is not immediately available from the provided text or quick search snippets, but I can infer it was filed in 2022 as per the case number.
• Status: Final Written Decision issued; Claims 1, 11, and 14 were found unpatentable.
• Judge panel: Not specified in the provided text.
• Petition grounds: The petition challenged claims 1-16 of U.S. Patent No. 9,202,191 B2 based on obviousness over various combinations of prior art.
• Institution decision: The Board instituted an inter partes review of claims 1–16 of U.S. Patent No. 9,202,191 B2 on the ground of obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over a combination of US 2008/0086386 A1 (Bell) in view of US 2006/0111955 A1 (Pratt).
• Final Written Decision: Issued on October 30, 2023. Claims 1-16 were found unpatentable. Specifically, the Board determined that Petitioner demonstrated by a preponderance of the evidence that claims 1–16 are unpatentable as obvious over Bell in view of Pratt.
  • Claims 1-16 were canceled.
  • The reasoning was that the combination of Bell and Pratt rendered the claimed invention obvious, addressing each element of the claims.
• Settlement / termination: The proceeding concluded with a Final Written Decision and was not terminated by settlement.
• Appeal: An appeal to the Federal Circuit was filed by Consumeron LLC. The appeal case is Consumeron LLC v. Unified Patents, LLC, No. 24-1706.
• Defensive value: This proceeding is highly valuable defensively. All 16 claims of US9202191B2, including the independent claims (1, 11, 14), have been found unpatentable by the PTAB. Any infringement theory built on these claims is significantly weakened, and this decision can be used to challenge assertions of infringement.

Strategic summary

All sixteen claims (1-16) of US9202191B2 were found unpatentable in IPR2022-01359. This means that, according to the PTAB, there are no sustained claims in this patent, and effectively, all claims have been tested and invalidated. The patent has been substantially narrowed to the point of having no patentable claims as per the FWD.

The estoppel landscape is highly favorable for a defendant. Unified Patents, LLC successfully challenged all claims, and the FWD found all 16 claims unpatentable. For any defendant asserted against, the prior-art grounds raised in IPR2022-01359 (Bell in view of Pratt) are now a strong basis for invalidity. While a petitioner (and its privies) would be estopped from raising grounds they did raise or reasonably could have raised against these claims, the unpatentability finding itself provides significant leverage.

A pattern signal is that Unified Patents, a defensive aggregator, initiated this IPR, indicating a perceived vulnerability in the patent. The patent owner, Consumeron LLC, has pursued an appeal to the Federal Circuit, suggesting a continued belief in the patent's validity despite the adverse PTAB decision.

Recommended next steps

As a defendant, you should leverage the Final Written Decision from IPR2022-01359, which found all claims 1-16 of US9202191B2 unpatentable. The disposition of the Final Written Decision states that claims 1-16 were found unpatentable over the combination of Bell and Pratt.

You can access the Final Written Decision for IPR2022-01359 through the USPTO PTAB Decisions search portal (PTAB E2E). You should also monitor the ongoing appeal at the Federal Circuit, case number 24-1706, to understand its final disposition. The outcome of this appeal will dictate the ultimate legal status of the claims found unpatentable by the PTAB.## Proceedings overview
One AIA trial proceeding has been filed against US Patent 9202191, resulting in a Final Written Decision that found all challenged claims unpatentable. This provides a strong defensive posture for a defendant, as the primary independent claims (and all other claims) have been canceled at the PTAB. The patent owner has appealed this decision to the Federal Circuit, and that appeal is currently pending.

IPR2022-01359 — Unified Patents, LLC v. Consumeron LLC

• Type: Inter Partes Review
• Filed: The IPR was filed in 2022, as indicated by the case number IPR2022-01359.
• Status: Final Written Decision issued; Claims 1-16 were found unpatentable on October 30, 2023. This decision is currently under appeal at the Federal Circuit.
• Judge panel: Not specified in the provided information.
• Petition grounds: The petition challenged claims 1-16 of U.S. Patent No. 9,202,191 B2 on the ground of obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
• Institution decision: The Board instituted an inter partes review of claims 1–16 of U.S. Patent No. 9,202,191 B2 on the ground of obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over a combination of US 2008/0086386 A1 (Bell) in view of US 2006/0111955 A1 (Pratt).
• Final Written Decision: Issued on October 30, 2023. All claims, specifically claims 1-16, were found unpatentable. The Board determined that Petitioner (Unified Patents, LLC) demonstrated by a preponderance of the evidence that claims 1–16 are unpatentable as obvious over Bell in view of Pratt.
• Settlement / termination: The proceeding concluded with a Final Written Decision, and there was no settlement.
• Appeal: The Final Written Decision was appealed to the Federal Circuit. The appeal is titled Consumerron LLC v. Unified Patents, LLC, with docket number 24-1706. The issues on appeal would generally revolve around the PTAB's obviousness finding.
• Defensive value: This IPR provides significant defensive value. All 16 claims of US9202191B2, including the independent claims (1, 11, and 14), have been found unpatentable by the PTAB. While the Federal Circuit appeal is pending, this FWD creates a strong prima facie case for invalidity against any assertion of these claims. If the Federal Circuit affirms the PTAB's decision, the patent will be effectively dead.

Strategic summary

All sixteen claims (1-16) of US9202191B2 were found unpatentable in IPR2022-01359. This means that, currently, no claims of US9202191 are sustained by the PTAB; all challenged claims have been found unpatentable. The patent owner, Consumeron LLC, has appealed this decision to the Federal Circuit (case 24-1706). Therefore, all claims are currently "found unpatentable, pending appeal," and there are no untested claims.

The estoppel landscape is highly favorable for a defendant, particularly if the Federal Circuit affirms the PTAB's decision. Unified Patents, LLC successfully challenged all claims, and the FWD found all 16 claims unpatentable. For any defendant facing assertion, the prior-art combination of Bell in view of Pratt, which formed the basis of the PTAB's unpatentability finding, presents a potent invalidity argument. While 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2) generally estops petitioners (and their privies) from raising grounds they raised or reasonably could have raised, the fact that the claims were invalidated by the PTAB provides a direct benefit to any defendant, as the patent itself has been significantly weakened.

A clear pattern signal is that Unified Patents, LLC, a defensive aggregator, successfully challenged the patent. This indicates that the patent was identified as a target for invalidation to protect its members and the broader technology community from assertions. The patent owner's decision to appeal the FWD to the Federal Circuit demonstrates a continued effort to uphold the validity of the patent, suggesting they view the claims as valuable despite the PTAB's ruling.

Recommended next steps

If you are a defendant, you should immediately cite the Final Written Decision from IPR2022-01359, issued October 30, 2023, which found all claims 1-16 of US9202191B2 unpatentable. You can access this FWD through the USPTO PTAB Decisions search portal. The disposition explicitly states that "claims 1–16 are unpatentable as obvious over Bell in view of Pratt."

It is crucial to monitor the ongoing appeal at the Federal Circuit, Consumerron LLC v. Unified Patents, LLC, docket number 24-1706. The Federal Circuit's decision will be determinative of the ultimate validity of these claims. While the appeal is pending, the PTAB's FWD finding all claims unpatentable provides strong leverage in any negotiation or litigation.