Harness, Dickey & Pierce, PLC

5445 Corporate Dr Suite 200
Troy, MI 48098, United States

  • (248) 641-1600
  • (248) 641-0270

Board Cuts Patent Owners Time in Half to Stay on Schedule

In Reloaded Games, Inc. v. Parallel Networks, LLC, IPR2014-00950, Paper 9 (July 8, 2014), Petitioner filed a second petition for inter partes review covering claims for which trial was not instituted in its first petition for…more
| Civil Procedure, Intellectual Property

Board Allows Rare Motion for Additional Discovery

In a relatively rare grant of a Motion For Additional Discovery, in Atlanta Gas Light Co. v. Bennett Regulator Guards, Inc. (IPR2013-00453,, Paper 40), Patent Owner sought additional discovery pertaining to its contention that…more
| Civil Procedure, Intellectual Property

More Details, Details

Integrated Global Concepts, Inc. v. J2 Global, Inc., IPR2014-01027, Paper 4 (July 7, 2014), the Board granted the petition a filing date, but required the petition to fix the claim charts, which may not “include arguments,…more
| Civil Procedure, Intellectual Property

Instruction Not to Answer on Relevance Grounds Improper in IPR Depositions

iStock_000001758213XSmallIn Dynamic Drinkware v. National Graphics, IPR 2013-00131, Patent Owner’s counsel prevented Petitioner from questioning a witness by instructing the witness not to answer questions on the ground of…more
| Civil Procedure, Intellectual Property

Patent Owner Failed to Justify Joining Five IPR’s

In Ford Motor Co. v. Cruise Control Technologies LLC, IPR2014-0281, Paper 19, (July 2, 2014) the Board denied patent owner’s motion to join five proceedings U.S. Patent No. 6,324,463. The Board ducked the question of whether…more
| Civil Procedure, Intellectual Property

Some Observations on Observations

In Hayward Industries, Inc. v. Pentainer Water Pool and Spa, Inc., IPR2013-00285, Paper 31, IPR2013-00287, Paper 31 (July 3, 2014), the Board provided some guidance on observations on cross-examination, answering the question…more
| Civil Procedure, Intellectual Property

Inventor Testimony Irrelevant

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…more
| Civil Procedure, Intellectual Property

Details, Details

In LG Electronics, Inc., v. NFC Technology LLC, IPR2014-00959 , Paper 3 (Julu 3. 2014), the Board granted the Petition a filing date, but pointed out that the font was incorrect and Petition failed to certifiy that the patent…more
| Civil Procedure, Intellectual Property

Patent Decisions on July 8, 2014

Final Written Decisions - Smith & Nephew, Inc.v. The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, IPR2-14-00112 , Paper 21 (July 8, 2014), the Board terminated the proceeding in view of the Settment between the parties…more
| Intellectual Property

Prior Art “Patents and Printed Publications” Include the Patent Under Review

In Intri-Plex Technologies, Inc. v. Saint-Gobain Performance Plastics Rencol Limited, IPR2014-00309, Paper 07/03/2014 19, the Board denied reconsideration that admitted prior art in the patent under review constituted “prior…more
| Civil Procedure, Intellectual Property

The Board Cannot Misapprehend or Overlooked an Argument Not Presented

In Rackspace US, Inc. v. PersonalWeb Technologies, LLC, IPR2014-00062, Paper (July 2, 2014) The Board denied rehearing of its decision not to institute an inter partes review of certain redundant grounds. In its request for…more
| Civil Procedure, Intellectual Property

A Party Needs Compelling Reasons for Discovery

Permobil, Inc. v. Pride Mobility Products Corporation, IPR2013-00407, Paper 43 (July 2, 2014), the Board denied the patent owner’s motion to compel production evidence of copying of the products embodying patent owner’s claims…more
| Civil Procedure, Intellectual Property

PTAB Grants Rare Motion for Reconsideration

In PNY Tech., Inc. v. Phison Elec. Corp., (IPR2013-00472, Paper 16), Patent Owner filed a request for rehearing of the Decision on Institution contesting the Board misinterpreted the governing law regarding inherency. To date,…more
| Civil Procedure, Intellectual Property

An Unsuccessful Reach for the STELARA, Written description of generic biomolecule claims

AbbVie owns US 6,914,128 (’128), which covers a variety of anti-IL12 monoclonal antibodies. AbbVie markets an anti-IL12 monoclonal (viz. Humira®) as a treatment for a variety of auto-immune disorders, including psoriasis…more
| Civil Procedure, Intellectual Property, Science, Computers, & Technology

Lost in the Translation: Deposing Translators

In NHK Seating of America, Inc. v. Lear Corporation, IPR2014-00115,Paper 27, (July 1, 2014), the patent owner objected to petitioner’s translation of one of the exhbiits, so the petitioner sought to file a new translation…more
| Civil Procedure, Intellectual Property
Showing 1-15 of 188 Results
View per page
Page: of 13
Areas of Practice
  • Appellate Practice
  • Intellectual Property
  • International Law & Trade
  • Litigation
  • Science, Computers, & Tech
Other U.S. Locations
  • Michigan
  • Missouri
  • Virginia
Number of Attorneys

100+ Attorneys

This profile may constitute attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Any correspondence with this profile holder does not constitute a client/attorney relationship. Neither the content on this profile nor transmissions between you and the profile holder through this profile are intended to provide legal or other advice or to create an attorney-client relationship.