Latest Publications

Share:

USPTO Proposes Phillips-Type Claim Construction For Post Grant Proceedings at the PTAB

The USPTO published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on May 9, 2018 seeking to change the claim construction standard for PTAB trials from the current broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) to the claim construction standard...more

PTAB Designates Informative Decisions on Discretionary Denial of Institution for Prior Art Previously Presented to the Office

On March 21, 2018, the PTAB designated two decisions as “informative” that denied institution for presenting prior art that had been previously presented during prosecution. Becton, Dickinson & Co. v. B. Braun Melsungen AG,...more

PTAB Issues Order Proposing Claim Amendments to Patent Owner

The PTAB issued an order stating that it would grant Patent Owner’s motion to amend claims upon Patent Owner accepting further claim amendments suggested by the judges in Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. Godo...more

In Re: Erik Brunetti

Federal Circuit Summaries - Before Dyk, Moore, and Stoll. Appeal from the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: The bar in § 2(a) of the Lanham Act against registering immoral or scandalous trademarks is an...more

USPTO to increase IPR fees by 33% and PGR fees by 27% in 2018

The USPTO announced that the official fees for IPR and PGR will increase significantly starting on January 16, 2018. See 82 Fed. Reg. 52780, 52807 (Nov. 14, 2017). ...more

PTAB Designates as “Informative” Three Discretionary Denials of IPR Institution Decisions

On October 24, 2017, the PTAB designated as “informative” the following three decisions that discretionarily denied institution of IPR petitions under 35 U.S.C. § 325(d). Section 325(d) provides that “the Director may take...more

PTAB Extends Deadline to Decide IPR Motion to Amend in view of Aqua Products

The PTAB extended the deadline for issuing its IPR final written decision on a motion to amend by up to six months to provide additional time to consider the impact of the Federal Circuit’s recent en banc Aqua Products...more

Federal Circuit Places The Burden Of Persuasion For Motions To Amend In IPRs On Petitioners

The Federal Circuit issued an en banc decision instructing the PTAB to assess patentability of amended claims in IPR proceedings without placing the burden of persuasion on the patent owner. Aqua Products, Inc. v. Matal, No....more

Standing to Appeal PTAB Decision to Federal Circuit is Measured for the Appellant, Not the Appellee

The Federal Circuit determined that Article III standing was not necessary for an appellee to participate in a judicial appeal of an IPR final written decision because the appellant had Article III standing in Personal Audio,...more

PTAB Designates As Precedential A Decision Finding Assignor Estoppel Is Not A Defense in IPRs

The PTAB recently designated as precedential its 2013 decision that assignor estoppel is not a defense for patent owners in IPR proceedings in Athena Automation Ltd. v. Husky Injection Molding Systems Ltd., IPR2013-00290,...more

PTAB Denies Apple's Motion to Withdraw IPR Petition and Motion for Joinder

The PTAB denied Apple’s motion to withdraw both its IPR petition and concurrent motion for joinder to prevent Apple from circumventing potential estoppel ramifications in Apple Inc. v. Papst Licensing GmbH & Co. KG,...more

Supreme Court Will Decide Whether the PTAB Must Address All Claims Challenged in a Petition

The Supreme Court granted a petition for writ of certiorari to address whether the PTAB is required to issue a final written decision with respect to the patentability of every claim challenged by a petitioner in SAS...more

Statements Made in an IPR Can Lead to Prosecution Disclaimer

The Federal Circuit held that statements made by a patent owner in an IPR, whether before or after institution, can be considered during claim construction in district court litigation and relied upon to support a finding of...more

PTAB Grants Joinder of Time-Barred Petitioner to IPR after Settlement with Original Petitioner

The PTAB granted joinder of a time-barred petitioner to an IPR trial after the patent owner settled its dispute with the original petitioner in AT&T Services, Inc. v. Convergent Media Solutions, LLC, IPR2017-01237, Paper 10...more

USPTO Director Grants Extension for Missed IPR Appeal to Federal Circuit

The USPTO Director granted a request to extend a missed deadline for an appeal of an IPR decision to the Federal Circuit due to the patent owner’s excusable neglect in Mitsubishi Cable Industr., Ltd. v. Goto Denshi Co., Ltd.,...more

PTAB Expunges Non-Compliant Motions for Observations on Cross-Examination

The PTAB expunged non-compliant motions for observations on cross-examination in Xilinx, Inc. v. Papst Licensing GMBH & Co., KG, IPR2016-00104, Paper 22 & IPR2016-00105, Paper 22 (P.T.A.B. May 3, 2017). ...more

Defect in Patent Assignment Results in IPR Challenge Effectively Going Unopposed

Old Republic’s IPR petition was effectively unopposed due to a defect in the chain of assignment, which led the PTAB to hold all claims unpatentable without considering arguments or evidence submitted in favor of...more

PTAB Grants-in-Part Motions to Amend in Three Related IPRs

The PTAB granted-in-part motions to amend in three related proceedings: Activision Blizzard, Inc. v. Acceleration Bay, LLC, IPR2015-01953, Paper 107 (P.T.A.B. sealed on March 23, 2017, made public on April 19, 2017);...more

PTAB Weighs Five Factors in Discretionary Denial of Xactware’s Second IPR Petition

The PTAB weighed five factors in its discretionary denial of a second IPR petition filed by the same petitioner in Xactware Solutions, Inc. v. Eagle View Tech., Inc., IPR2017-00034, Paper 9 (P.T.A.B. April 13, 2017)....more

PTAB Grants Rare Motion to Amend

The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision in Amerigen Pharm. Ltd. v. Shire LLC, IPR2015-02009, Paper 38 (P.T.A.B. March 31, 2017) granting a rare motion to amend. The motion canceled all instituted claims and amended a...more

PTAB Denies Institution of Sixth IPR Petition Filed Against Adaptive Headlamp’s Patent

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) invoked its discretion under 35 U.S.C. § 325(d) to deny Toyota’s IPR petition against Adaptive Headlamp’s U.S. Patent No. 7,241,034 (“the ’034 patent”) in Toyota Motor Co. v....more

Final Written Decision Relies on Unexpected Results To Uphold Pozen’s Ulcer Reducing Vimovo® Claims Over Kyle Bass’s IPR Challenge

The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision upholding Pozen’s ulcer reducing Vimovo® claims based on unexpected results in Coalition For Affordable Drugs VII LLC v. Pozen Inc., IPR2015-01718, Paper 40 (P.T.A.B., Feb. 21, 2017)....more

IPR Denied after Board Finds Asserted PCT Publication Not Entitled to Priority Application’s Filing Date under Pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. §...

The PTAB denied institution of an IPR based on patent owner’s challenge to the prior art status of a PCT publication that was asserted by the petitioner as pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) prior art in Forty Seven, Inc. v....more

PTAB Grants Rare IPR Request for Rehearing in WesternGeco LLC v. PGS Geophysical AS

The PTAB recently granted a request for rehearing and modified the final written decision in WesternGeco LLC v. PGS Geophysical AS, IPR2015-00313, Paper 43 (P.T.A.B., Feb. 3, 2017). This is an extremely rare event....more

The USPTO Amends AIA Trial Rules: 4 Changes That You Need To Know

On April 1, 2016, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued amended final rules that govern trials under the America Invents Act (AIA), including inter partes review, post-grant review, covered business method...more

25 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide