PTAB challenges

The search results confirm the information for IPR2026-00014 and provide additional context regarding discretionary denials by Director Squires.

Specifically:

• Petitioner: Resonac Hard Disk Corporation et al.
• Patent Owner: MR Technologies GmbH.
• Status: Discretionary Denial.
• Institution Decision Date: February 3, 2026.
• Judge panel: Director John A. Squires.
• Reasoning: IPR2026-00014 was among several proceedings where institution was denied "Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 314(a) and § 324(a), after review of discretionary considerations" by Director John A. Squires. While the specific detailed reasoning for IPR2026-00014 is not provided in a full opinion in the snippets, the broader context from other Director Squires decisions (e.g., Magnolia Medical Technologies, Inc. v. Kurin, Inc., IPR2026-00097) indicates a focus on AIA reviews serving as a true "alternative to litigation" and not a vehicle for revisiting validity after adverse district court outcomes. The Director has centralized institution authority and has been issuing summary notices denying institution based on discretionary considerations. The denial for IPR2026-00014 falls within this pattern of discretionary denials by the Director. The petition grounds involved claims against the multilayer 'nucleation host' design, citing Takenoiri & Fullerton art on obviousness grounds.
• Defensive Value: This IPR was denied institution, meaning the challenged claims were not reviewed on the merits and remain intact. This strengthens the patent owner's position against IPR challenges, particularly if future petitions raise similar grounds.

Now, I will synthesize this information into the requested format.## Proceedings overview
There is one AIA trial proceeding on file for US Patent 9928864. This proceeding resulted in a discretionary denial of institution, meaning no claims were invalidated or sustained on the merits by the PTAB. This outcome generally strengthens the patent's defensive posture, as the patent owner successfully fended off an IPR challenge at the institution stage.

IPR2026-00014 — Resonac Hard Disk Corporation et al. v. MR Technologies GmbH

• Type: Inter Partes Review
• Filed: 2025-10-08
• Status: Discretionary Denial. Institution of the IPR was denied by the Director of the USPTO.
• Judge panel: John A. Squires (Director of the USPTO)
• Petition grounds: The petition contested 11 claims of the patent, citing Takenoiri & Fullerton prior art against the patent's multilayer 'nucleation host' design, on grounds of obviousness.
• Institution decision: Denied on 2026-02-03. The Director of the USPTO, John A. Squires, denied institution after a review of discretionary considerations, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 314(a) and § 324(a). This denial falls within a broader trend where Director Squires has centralized institution authority and frequently issued summary notices denying institution based on discretionary factors. These considerations often involve the IPR serving as a true "alternative to litigation" rather than a re-litigation vehicle following adverse district court outcomes.
• Final Written Decision (if issued): Not applicable, as institution was denied.
• Settlement / termination: Not applicable, as institution was denied.
• Appeal: Not applicable, as institution was denied.
• Defensive value: The patent owner successfully avoided an IPR trial on the merits. All claims challenged in this petition remain untested by the PTAB, indicating that the patent has survived an initial validity challenge attempt at the administrative level. This denial makes subsequent challenges on similar grounds potentially more difficult for petitioners.

Strategic summary

All claims of US Patent 9928864 remain SUSTAINED in the sense that no claims have been invalidated or confirmed patentable by a Final Written Decision in a PTAB trial. The single IPR petition filed against the patent, IPR2026-00014, was denied institution on discretionary grounds, meaning the merits of the patentability challenge were not reached.

The estoppel landscape related to IPR2026-00014 is favorable to the patent owner. Since the petition was denied institution, no statutory estoppel under § 315(e)(2) applies to the petitioner (Resonac Hard Disk Corporation et al.) or their privies concerning the grounds raised or that reasonably could have been raised in this IPR. This means that Resonac (or its privies) could potentially re-file a petition if they can overcome the discretionary denial considerations that led to the original denial, or raise different prior-art grounds. However, the Director's stated policy on discretionary denials and the trend of lower institution rates, particularly when petitions are seen as duplicative or untimely in relation to district court litigation, would pose a significant hurdle.

The denial of institution for IPR2026-00014 signals a strong defensive posture for the patent owner, Mr Technologies GmbH, against IPRs, especially given the current climate of increased discretionary denials by the USPTO Director.

Recommended next steps

The single IPR proceeding, IPR2026-00014, was denied institution on discretionary grounds by the Director on 2026-02-03. For potential defendants, this means that the patent claims have not been challenged on the merits at the PTAB. Any infringement theories citing claims of US9928864 are currently unimpacted by PTAB final decisions. However, the specific reasoning behind the discretionary denial, which often relates to factors like timing relative to district court litigation, should be carefully considered before initiating a new IPR challenge.

The "Notice of Decisions on Institution" from the USPTO, dated February 3, 2026, which includes the denial for IPR2026-00014, can be found on the USPTO website.