Patent 9549918
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: Veloxis Pharmaceuticals AS
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 Open Data Portal (ODP) API currently indicates no AIA trial proceedings on file for US Patent 9,549,918 as of its most recent ingest. A comprehensive web search for Inter Partes Review (IPR), Post-Grant Review (PGR), or Covered Business Method (CBM) proceedings related to US9549918 also did not surface any active or concluded cases. This means the patent has not been subjected to validity challenges before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).
Strategic summary
As of the current date, no claims of US Patent 9,549,918 have been challenged, canceled, or sustained through any PTAB trial proceedings. Consequently, all claims (claims 1-15) of the patent remain untested in this forum.
The absence of PTAB activity indicates that, from a defensive posture, a defendant currently being asserted against by Veloxis Pharmaceuticals Inc. would face the patent in its original granted form. There is no existing estoppel landscape from PTAB proceedings that would bar a defendant (or their privies) from raising any prior art grounds in a new IPR or other validity challenge. The lack of PTAB challenges for a patent that has been involved in district court litigation (as noted in the "Litigation summary" section) is an interesting signal; often, patents asserted in district court, particularly under the Hatch-Waxman Act, become targets for IPR petitions.
Recommended next steps
Since no PTAB activity currently exists for US Patent 9,549,918, a potential defendant has several options:
- Validity Analysis: Conduct a thorough prior art search and validity analysis to identify potential grounds for an IPR petition. This would involve scrutinizing claims 1-15 against existing prior art, especially those references cited in the patent's prosecution history (e.g., WO 2005/020993 A1, US 6,372,760 B1, US 4,716,153 A).
- Monitor PTAB Filings: Regularly monitor the USPTO PTAB search portals (e.g., P-TACTS) for any new petitions filed against US9549918, especially given the ongoing district court litigation involving generic drug manufacturers.
- Consider Filing an IPR: If strong prior art grounds are identified, filing an IPR petition could be a strategic move to challenge the validity of the patent's claims. This would initiate a trial before the PTAB, which has a statutory 1-year deadline from institution to issue a Final Written Decision.
Generated 5/31/2026, 6:48:13 AM