In That Case: Department of State v. Muñoz
False Claims Act Insights - Railroaded! How to Approach the Twin Tracks of Parallel Proceedings
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 334: Listen and Learn -- Standards of Review (Con Law)
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 160: Listen and Learn -- Standards of Review (Con Law)
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 295: Listen and Learn -- Due Process and Equal Protection (Con Law)
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 117: Listen and Learn -- Due Process and Equal Protection (Con Law)
Personal Jurisdiction Part 3 – Oral Arguments in the Ford Cases [More with McGlinchey Ep. 12]
Day 11 of One Month to Better Compliance Through HR-the Fair Process Doctrine
Webinar: Investigating and Resolving Sexual Assaults on Campus
Former Solicitor General Ted Olson Discusses 2013's Biggest Supreme Court Case—His.
Precedential Federal Circuit Opinions - MEDYTOX, INC. v. GALDERMA S.A. [OPINION] (2022-1165, 6/27/2023) (Dyk, Reyna, and Stark) - Reyna, J. The Court affirmed a decision by the PTAB in a post-grant review denying an...more
Precedential Opinion Addresses Conclusory Expert Declarations - In a precedential opinion in Xerox Corp. v. Bytemark, Inc., IPR2022-00624, Paper 9 (P.T.A.B. Aug. 24, 2022), the Board denied institution of an inter partes...more
Intel Corp. petitioned for six inter partes reviews (IPRs) challenging the validity of U.S. Patent No. 9,608,675, a patent directed to power management in wireless devices. In each proceeding, Intel and patent-owner Qualcomm...more
Mylan appealed from a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Board) discretionary denial of institution of an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding. The Board declined to institute Mylan’s IPR under NHK-Fintiv, a multi-factor analysis...more
[co-author: Jamie Dohopolski] Last year, the continued global COVID-19 pandemic forced American courts to largely continue the procedures set in place in 2020. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was no...more
Is the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) constitutional? This was a question asked by Mobility Workx in Mobility Workx, LLC v. Unified Patents, LLC, 2021-1441, 2021 WL 4762265 (Fed. Cir. 2021). Mobility Workx raised...more
In Mobility Workx, LLC v. Unified Patents, LLC, the Federal Circuit in a split decision concluded that Mobility Workx, LLC’s constitutional challenges to structure and funding of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) are...more
MOBILITY WORKX, LLC v. UNIFIED PATENTS, LLC Before Newman, Schall, and Dyk. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Fee-funded structure of AIA review proceedings does not violate due process....more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated several Patent Trial & Appeal Board (PTAB) decisions as violating due process and the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), referencing the parties’ inability to respond...more
Qualcomm Inc. v. Intel Corp., Appeal Nos. 2020-1589, et al. (Fed. Cir. July 27, 2021) - In the only precedential patent decision issued by the Federal Circuit this week, the Court addressed again the due process and...more
In response to arguments made by the US government in an appeal pending before the US Supreme Court, members of Congress requested an investigation into the adequacy of due process afforded to Patent Trial and Appeal Board...more
From the beginning of AIA proceedings, Petitioners that have lost at institution decision phase have tried using Mandamus to circumvent the statutory lack of appeal from institution decisions. Mylan Laboratories Ltd. v....more
The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return on investment for all stakeholders looking at the entire...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that 35 USC § 314(d) did not bar its review of a Patent Trial & Appeal Board determination that a petitioner was not estopped from maintaining inter partes review (IPR)...more
Originating tribunal: Patent Trial and Appeal Board - Date: March 12, 2021 - Panel: Judges Newman, Moore, and Stoll, with Judge Moore writing the precedential order - Result: Appeal dismissed, and mandamus...more
MYLAN LABS. LTD. v. JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICA, N.V. Before Newman, Moore, and Stoll. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: The Federal Circuit lacks jurisdiction over appeals from decisions denying...more
Security People lost an inter partes review (IPR) and appealed to the Federal Circuit. It lost that appeal and was denied certiorari at the Supreme Court. Security People never raised constitutional arguments in any of these...more
FanDuel petitioned for inter partes review (IPR) of certain claims of Interactive Games’ patent. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board instituted review and found all but dependent claim 6 to be unpatentable as obvious. ...more
In an appeal from the Northern District of California, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s dismissal of Security People’s Administrative Procedure Act (APA) suit challenging the constitutionality of inter partes...more
SECURITY PEOPLE, INC. v. IANCU - Before Lourie, Wallach, and Hughes. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California - Summary: Congress foreclosed the possibility of...more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) obstacles to successful motions to amend have been daunting. As published previously, filing motions to amend have historically been an exercise in futility due to their low chance...more
Arthrex recently filed a(nother) certiorari petition with the Supreme Court, this time in Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., which has also been the subject of petitions from the U.S. government and Smith & Nephew. (This...more
Since the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s inception, it has faced questions regarding its constitutionality. This past year was no different. In 2019, aggrieved patent owners raised numerous constitutional challenges...more
2019 was another milestone year in intellectual property law that resulted in hundreds of decisions by the courts and Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) that will affect your company’s litigation, patent prosecution or...more
In CELGENE CORPORATION v. PETER, the Federal Circuit recently affirmed the PTAB’s decisions finding appealed claims obvious. However, more importantly, the Federal Circuit also held that the retroactive application of IPR...more