PATENT ENFORCEMENT: CELLTRUST V. IONLAKE – MYREPCHAT

 

On January 21, 2026, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit entered its decision in the CellTrust v. MyRepChat case. The Court did “vacate-in-part the judgment and remand for the limited purpose of correcting the judgment to just address the asserted claims of the asserted patents.” The appellate court instructed the district court to correct the clerical error and make clear that the judgment on the ‘012 and ‘837 patents is limited to the eight specific asserted claims, and not the patents in their entirety.

In November 2024, CellTrust announced that it had received Ex Parte Reexamination Certificates from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office that confirm the patentability of new CellTrust patent claims in the ‘012 and ‘837 patents, which were not before the Federal Circuit. https://www.celltrust.com/uspto-rejects-third-party-challenge/ Those new patent claims strengthen CellTrust’s patent portfolio and address any concerns raised within the Federal Circuit on the eight claims at issue in the trial.

With the new claims added in the Ex Parte Reexamination Certificates, CellTrust’s ‘012 patent contains an additional 32 claims, and the ‘837 patent contains an additional 29 claims over the eight claims at issue at the Federal Circuit. CellTrust looks forward to continuing to protect its innovations through its patent portfolio.

 

UPDATE AUGUST 2024

In August 2024, CellTrust was victorious in the third-party challenge in front of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“the USPTO”) for claims of U.S. Patent No.9,775,012 (“the ’012 Patent”) and claims of U.S. Patent No. 10,778,837 (“the ’837 Patent”) and received Ex Parte Reexamination Certificates from the USPTO.

The USPTO rejected the third-party’s challenge to the original patent claims, which remain the subject of other ongoing litigation. Even more, the USPTO confirmed the patentability of new patent claims that are not currently the subject matter of ongoing litigation.

 

MAY 2023

While the jury did not decide in CellTrust’s favor on eight of the 50 claims within the ‘012 and ‘837 patents, CellTrust believes that the results were contrary to and not supported by the evidence and intends to seek available post-verdict relief. CellTrust continues to believe in the strength of its patents and will vigorously enforce its intellectual property rights.

 

For patent licensing please contact: