Rave Wireless and Motorola Solutions Petition for Inter Partes Review of Two Samscloud Geofencing Supervision Patents.

The parties and the patents

The proceedings are Rave Wireless, Inc. and Motorola Solutions, Inc. v. Samscloud, LLC, IPR2027-00009 (U.S. Patent 11,468,757) and IPR2027-00010 (U.S. Patent 12,154,421). The petitioners are Rave Wireless, Inc. and Motorola Solutions, Inc. Each petition identifies the two petitioners as the real parties in interest and says Rave Wireless is a wholly owned subsidiary of Motorola Solutions. The petitions name Samscloud, LLC as the patent owner. Both patents are titled Systems and Methods for Facilitating Supervision of Individuals Based on Geofencing and claim priority to a provisional application filed March 5, 2019. The '757 patent issued October 11, 2022 with 18 claims. The '421 patent issued November 26, 2024 with 24 claims from a continuation-in-part of the application that became the '757 patent. Each patent names its individual inventor as the applicant and lists no assignee, and the USPTO Assignment Center shows no recorded assignment of either patent.

What the claims cover

Claim 1 of each patent covers a method for facilitating supervision of individuals based on geofencing. A communication device receives at least one security parameter and a geographical location from a supervisor device, and a processing device analyzes the location based on the security parameter and generates a geofence corresponding to a geographical area. The method then receives supervisee data from a supervisee device, analyzes that data based on the geofence, generates a supervision notification, transmits it to the supervisor device, and stores the supervisee data and the notification. The geofence is made up of geofence grid boxes: the method receives a grid parameter from the supervisor device, determines the grid box area from it, and generates a number of grid boxes.

The grounds

IPR2027-00009 challenges claims 1 to 18 of the '757 patent on four grounds. Ground 1 asserts that claims 1 to 4, 6, 8, 10 to 13, 15, and 17 would have been obvious over Staton, U.S. Patent 7,317,927. Ground 2 asserts claims 5, 7, 9, 14, 16, and 18 over Staton combined with Noland, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2018/0158305. Ground 3 asserts claims 1 to 4, 6 to 8, 10 to 13, and 15 to 17 over Rauner, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2019/0166480, combined with Azmoodeh, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2017/0287006. Ground 4 asserts claims 5, 9, 14, and 18 over Rauner, Azmoodeh, and Noland.

IPR2027-00010 challenges claims 1 to 24 of the '421 patent on six grounds. Ground 1 asserts claims 1 to 4, 6, 10 to 14, 16, 20, and 21 over Staton. Ground 2 asserts claims 5, 7, 8, 15, 17 to 19, and 22 to 24 over Staton and Noland. Ground 3 asserts claim 9 over Staton and Smith, U.S. Patent 10,085,117. Ground 4 asserts claims 1 to 4, 6 to 8, 10 to 14, and 16 to 21 over Rauner and Azmoodeh. Ground 5 asserts claims 5, 15, and 22 to 24 over Rauner, Azmoodeh, and Noland. Ground 6 asserts claim 9 over Rauner, Azmoodeh, and Smith.

Every ground in both petitions is an obviousness ground under 35 U.S.C. 103, combining the cited references with the knowledge of a person of ordinary skill in the art. The petitions assert that Staton, Noland, Azmoodeh, and Smith are prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2), and that Rauner is prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). The petitions also argue that a separate Staton patent, U.S. Patent 7,881,733, which the Office cited during prosecution, discloses the geofence grid box functionality that the Office found missing from the prior art when it allowed the claims. That patent appears among the references cited on the '757 patent. Each petition relies on a technical expert's declaration.

Related matters

The petitions list three related actions in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, filed July 23, 2026. According to the petitions, Samscloud asserted the '757 and '421 patents against Rave Wireless, Inc., d/b/a Rave Mobile Safety, in No. 1:26-cv-00900, and asserted the '757 patent against Raptor Technologies, LLC in No. 1:26-cv-00899 and against Genetec Inc. in No. 1:26-cv-00901. The '757 petition says a reissue application was filed on the '757 patent on April 29, 2024, to correct alleged errors in dependent claims 9 and 18, that the examiner rejected all of the patent's claims 1 to 18 in that proceeding on June 4, 2026, and that the applicant expressly abandoned the reissue on September 23, 2026.

What to watch next

Under 37 CFR 42.107(b), the patent owner may file a preliminary response in each proceeding within three months of the notice according the petition a filing date. Under the USPTO's interim Director discretionary process, any discretionary denial brief is due within two months of that notice. Watch for the notices, those filings, and the institution decisions.