Inventor Testimony Irrelevant

more+
less-

In International Business Machines Corporation v.Intellectual Ventures II LLC, IPR2014-00180, Paper 22, (July 3, 2014), the Board denied petitioner’s request to file a transcript of the inventor’s testimony as supplemental information.  The Board was unpersuaded by the argument that the inventor testimony is relevant to a claim for which trial has been instituted. The Board said that the general relevancy of an inventor’s testimony regarding the operation of the invention has little relevance to inter partse review proceedings. The possibility that it might be useful in understanding the invention is not significant enough to show that consideration of the information would be in the interests of justice to allow additional testimony on issues already developed by Petitioner on the record.  The Board observed that the request focused on its utility to the panel’s understanding of the technology or assistance in claim construction, a utility that seems generic in nature and untethered to any specific claim for which trial has been instituted.

 

 

Topics:  Expert Testimony, IBM, Inter Partes Review Proceedings, Inventors, Patent Litigation, Patents

Published In: Civil Procedure Updates, Intellectual Property Updates

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Harness, Dickey & Pierce, PLC | Attorney Advertising

Don't miss a thing! Build a custom news brief:

Read fresh new writing on compliance, cybersecurity, Dodd-Frank, whistleblowers, social media, hiring & firing, patent reform, the NLRB, Obamacare, the SEC…

…or whatever matters the most to you. Follow authors, firms, and topics on JD Supra.

Create your news brief now - it's free and easy »