Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 05 SEPTEMBER 2025

Acting Director Reverses Previous Discretionary Denial

Jones Day
Jones Day
Contributor
Jones Day

Jones Day

Jones Day is a global law firm with more than 2,400 lawyers in 40 offices across five continents....

View firm profile
Explore more from Jones Day

For the first time under the bifurcated institution procedures, the Acting Director reversed her own prior discretionary denial, citing changed circumstances based on a settlement in the parallel district court litigation.

United StatesIntellectual Property

For the first time under the bifurcated institution procedures, the Acting Director reversed her own prior discretionary denial, citing changed circumstances based on a settlement in the parallel district court litigation. See Arm Ltd. v. Daedalus Prime LLC, No. IPR2025-00207, Paper 14 (P.T.A.B. Aug. 6, 2025).

In April 2024, Daedalus filed a complaint in the Eastern District of Texas against MediaTek, claiming that MediaTek had infringed eight chip technology patents. Compl., Daedalus Prime LLC v. MediaTek, Inc., No. 2:24-CV-00235 (E.D. Tex. Apr. 8, 2024). MediaTek challenged the validity of four of these patents in IPR petitions filed between October 2024 and January 2025. See IPR2024-01488; IPR2025-00100; IPR2025-00207; IPR2025-00243. In one of the four IPRs, a third party, Arm, joined MediaTek as a petitioner, challenging the validity of U.S. Patent No. 8,984,228 (the "'228 Patent"). In accordance with the new bifurcated procedure,

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from