Stratasys v. Bambu Lab: PTAB Rulings Cancel Claims, Not Damages
3D PrintingTwo weeks after a Texas jury ordered Bambu Lab to pay Stratasys $27.6 million, the US Patent Trial and Appeal Board found claims in four Stratasys patents unpatentable, including two patents the jury had found infringed. 3D Printing Industry’s analysis shows the rulings touch only $2.8 million of that award, yet they reach further into Stratasys’s second, untried lawsuit. For anyone running Bambu Lab printers, or weighing whether the case threatens the company’s features, the result is more nuanced than either side’s headline.
What Happened
The PTAB issued final written decisions in late September and early October in four inter partes review proceedings filed by Shenzhen Tuozhu Technology, Bambu Lab’s parent company.
- US 10,556,381 (force detection): all challenged claims unpatentable. This patent was part of the jury verdict.
- US 9,168,698 (force detection): 14 of 15 challenged claims unpatentable, including claim 10, which the jury found infringed. Only claim 12 survived.
- US 11,886,774 (printer configuration data): all 14 challenged claims unpatentable. This patent is in the second lawsuit.
- US 10,569,466 (reading tagged build material, such as RFID chips on filament spools, to set print parameters): all 17 challenged claims unpatentable. Also in the second lawsuit.
According to the signed judgment in the Texas case, the two force-detection patents accounted for $2.8 million of the damages. Stack Archive covered the original verdict in Stratasys Wins $27.6M Against Bambu Lab — Jury Finds Willful Infringement on 4 Patents.
Why It Matters
The verdict and the rulings aren’t contradictory, because they apply different standards. A federal court presumes patents valid and requires clear and convincing evidence to overturn them; the jury found Bambu Lab hadn’t met that bar. The PTAB only requires the challenger to show unpatentability by a preponderance of the evidence.
None of this automatically shrinks the award. Stratasys can appeal to the Federal Circuit, and under 35 U.S.C. 318(b) the patent office cancels claims only after appeals run out or conclude. Most of the money also rests on patents these rulings don’t touch:
| Patent | Subject | Share of award | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| US 9,421,713 | Purge tower | $14.2M | Upheld by PTAB in June 2026; Bambu has appealed |
| US 7,555,357 | Toolpath generation | $10.6M | Under ex parte reexamination; expires March 2027 |
| ’381 and ‘698 | Force detection | $2.8M | Claims ruled unpatentable, pending appeal |
What This Means for Makers
The second lawsuit is where the rulings bite. Two of its five asserted patents now have their challenged claims ruled unpatentable before a jury sees them, if the decisions stand, and claims of a third were held unpatentable in an earlier PTAB proceeding in June 2026. That case has no trial date. One of them, the ‘466 patent, covers reading RFID-tagged spools to set print parameters.
The next milestone in the first case is 16 October 2026, the deadline for post-trial motions, including any request to overturn the verdict or order a new trial.
The So What
Bambu Lab owners and buyers don’t need to change plans based on these rulings: nothing in the source points to a feature being withdrawn, and the $27.6 million award still stands while appeals run. Print farms and resellers with heavy exposure to one vendor should watch two dates instead: the 16 October post-trial motions and the Federal Circuit appeal on the purge tower patent, which carries over half the damages.
Source: 3D Printing Industry
Content created with AI assistance and reviewed for accuracy.
Join the conversation
Stack Insiders is our free community for readers who want to go deeper — share resources, ask questions, and connect with others across every vertical we cover.
Join Stack Insiders →