Webinar | Women’s Nutrition: Nourishing Womanhood From Pregnancy To Menopause
11 September | 12 PM ET: Register Now

The PTAB Pulse

Institution, discretion, and the decisions that move litigation from GreyB's PTAB Analytics desk.

Monthly briefing

Delivered to your inbox

Premium analysis

The PTAB Pulse - July Edition

Analyst's note

July belonged to Tesla. The automaker drove the month’s docket 13 petitions, every one instituted as its seven-patent campaign against NPE Bulletproof Property Management cleared institution and it swept Charge Fusion’s EV-charging patents at final decision. Automotive surged to nearly a quarter of all tracked cases. The broader numbers moved with it: institution climbed to 55% (from 44% in June), and once petitions were instituted, challengers dominated 14 of 24 final decisions cancelled the patent outright. The discretionary gate stayed the main obstacle: 71% of July’s denials were discretionary, still driven by parallel-court timing. The message of the month: get past institution, and the merits are increasingly falling the petitioner’s way.

image (3)
Shallu Dhauta

Overview

55%

July institution rate

July institution rate across GreyB's tracked decisions (29 of 53) up sharply from 44% in June

Top decisions of the month

AUTOMOTIVE / EV CHARGING

Tesla, Inc. v. Charge Fusion Technologies, LLC,

IPR2025-00152 & -00153

Posture

Two IPRs against an EV-charging NPE’s patents, decided at final written decision (July 13).

Held

All challenged claims cancelled in both proceedings a clean petitioner sweep.

Why it matters

Tesla’s month in one case: it wiped out a charging-tech NPE at final decision the same month its seven-petition campaign against Bulletproof Property Management cleared institution. The EV-
patent fight is now Tesla’s to lose.

SEMICONDUCTORS / MEMORY

Micron Technology v. Yangtze Memory Technologies Co.,
IPR2025-00190, -00191, -00228

Posture

Three more final decisions in the ongoing memory campaign against a Chinese maker (early–mid July).

Held

One patent fully cancelled, one partially cancelled, one survived intact a genuine split.

Why it matters

The Micron–YMTC fight that ran through June continued into July with a mixed result proof that even a strong, sustained campaign does not take every patent, and each claim set fights on its own record.

HEALTHCARE / WEARABLES

Samsung Electronics Co. v. Ouraring, Inc.,

IPR2025-00147

Posture

Samsung's challenge to a smart-ring maker's patent, decided at final written decision (July 10).

Held

All challenged claims survived a clean win for the patent owner.

Why it matters

A wearables innovator held its ground against a giant. In a month when petitioners won most fights, this is the counter-example: a well-drafted patent can still beat a deep-pocketed challenger on the merits.

Want PTAB decisions before everyone else?
Subscribers get the current month on day one.

Institution Scoreboard & Discretionary Docket

Institution: 55% (29 granted of 53 decided in July). Denials: 24 – 71% discretionary (17), 6 on the
merits, 1 procedural. Of the discretionary denials, 13 turned on parallel-court timing (Fintiv). The
busiest refusals: Cisco drew three straight Fintiv denials against OptimNet, and Uber’s challenge to Carma
Technology was denied on the same ground. The gate is still where petitions die but fewer died there in
July than in June.

By the numbers

On the docket - what to watch​

Don't wait a month for this.

Subscribe to The PTAB Pulse and get the latest edition the day it drops – institution data, decision analysis, and practice pointers, before anyone else.

Subscribe PTAB Pulse