Final Written Decision on Assa Abloy’s (Petitioner) IPR2022-01045 and IPR2022-01089 and IPR2022-01006 Petition against the Company’s Remote Entry System patents, U.S. Patent 9,269,208 (“the ’208 Patent”) –
Excerpt from Bloomberg Law
Aug. 16, 2024, 12:32 AM GMT+10
Bloomberg Law Automation
On remand from the U.S. PTO director’s review determining that no challenged claims of CPC Patent Technologies Pty. Ltd.’s patent that discloses a system for providing secure access to a controlled item are unpatentable as obvious over prior art, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board determined that ASSA ABLOY AB, ASSA ABLOY Inc., HID Global Corporation, ASSA ABLOY Global Solutions Inc. and Master Lock Company LLC didn’t meet their burden to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that any of the challenged claims are unpatentable. According to the board, the cited references don’t disclose or suggest the claim limitations. …
Final Written Decision on Assa Abloy’s (Petitioner) IPR2022-01045 and IPR2022-01089 and IPR2022-01006 Petition against the Company’s Remote Entry System patents, U.S. Patent 9,665,705 (the ‘705 patent’) –
Excerpt from Bloomberg Law
Aug. 16, 2024, 12:29 AM GMT+10
Bloomberg Law Automation
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board said ASSA ABLOY AB, ASSA ABLOY Inc., HID Global Corporation, ASSA ABLOY Global Solutions Inc., and Master Lock Company LLC didn’t meet their burden of showing that challenged claims of CPC Patent Technologies Pty. Ltd.’s patent that discloses a system for providing secure access to a controlled item are unpatentable as obvious over prior art, on remand from the U.S. PTO director’s review determining that no challenged claims are unpatentable. The board said that the cited references don’t disclose or suggest the claim limitations.