Patent 9275982
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
A comprehensive search for AIA trial proceedings concerning US Patent 9275982 revealed no PTAB activity on file. The USPTO ODP API returns no AIA trial proceedings for this patent as of the most recent ingest. [cite: The USPTO ODP API returns no AIA trial proceedings for this patent as of the most recent ingest.] Therefore, there are no active, settled, or concluded PTAB proceedings to report, meaning all claims of the patent are currently untested by AIA trials. This gives a defendant no immediate defensive posture from PTAB invalidation, as all claims remain presumptively valid in this context.
Strategic summary
As of today, July 8, 2026, all claims of US Patent 9275982 remain UNTESTED by any AIA trial proceeding before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. There are no claims that have been canceled or sustained through IPR, PGR, or CBM trials.
Given the absence of any PTAB proceedings, there is no estoppel landscape established under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2). This means that a defendant facing assertion of this patent would not be barred from raising any prior-art grounds in a future PTAB petition, assuming they meet the statutory requirements for filing.
There are no pattern signals to discern regarding this patent owner's PTAB defense strategies or specific petitioners targeting this patent, as it has not yet been challenged in an AIA trial. The absence of PTAB activity can be a signal in itself: well-asserted patents often attract IPRs.
Recommended next steps
Since no PTAB activity exists for US Patent 9275982, a potential defendant has a clear path to consider initiating an AIA trial if they believe valid grounds for invalidity exist (e.g., under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 or 103). If a demand letter or infringement allegation cites this patent, a defendant should:
- Conduct a thorough prior art search: Identify potential invalidity grounds for all asserted claims.
- Evaluate petition feasibility: Assess the strength of any identified prior art against the patent claims and determine if it meets the "reasonable likelihood of success" standard for institution of an IPR or PGR.
- Consider filing an AIA petition: If strong grounds are found, filing an IPR or PGR petition could be a strategic defensive move.
Generated 7/8/2026, 6:01:17 PM