Evidence Patents

News & Analysis as of

Post-Grant Proceedings: The Top Seven Things You Should Know About the Proposed Rule Changes

On August 20th, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office published proposed rules that would amend the consolidated set of rules currently governing Inter Partes Reviews, Post-Grant Reviews, Covered Business Method Reviews, and...more

Know Them Before They are Famous (or at least final): The Latest USPTO Proposed Rule Changes

On August 19, 2015, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) released proposed rule changes for trials before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). The proposed rule changes were made in response to input...more

USPTO Proposes New Rules For PTAB Trial Proceedings

Practice Points: USPTO responds to public comments on PTAB trial procedures, publishes several proposed rule changes for 60 day comment period....more

Post-Trial Relief Is Denied Except For The Calculation Of Pre-Judgment Interest

The disputed technology relates to using internet technology to route calls through a network. A 6-day jury trial took place in October 2014 resulting in a jury verdict for plaintiff. The court finds there was sufficient...more

Ninth Circuit Affirms Judge Robart’s RAND Decision (Microsoft V. Motorola)

Yesterday, the Ninth Circuit court of appeals issued a decision affirming Judge Robart’s RAND decision in the much watched Microsoft v. Motorola case, basically ruling that the determination of a reasonable and...more

Six Tips for Demonstratives in PTAB Hearings

Oral hearings before the PTAB are the time to shine, to convince the judges why your position is right, why your opponent’s position is wrong, and to address questions head-on and reassure the judges regarding any real or...more

Submission of Supplemental Evidence in an IPR May Be Submitted After the Due Date - International Business Machines Corp. v....

Addressing the circumstances for submitting supplemental evidence in an inter partes review (IPR), the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) allowed the petitioner to submit a responsive declaration after the due date...more

Beware the Quagmire of Personal Jurisdiction

A plaintiff in the District of New Hampshire recently found itself stuck in an unenviable and inescapable jurisdictional hole. Plaintiff Presby Patent Trust sued Infiltrator Systems, a Connecticut-based manufacturer and...more

Amendments to PATENT Act Proposal Takes Aim at IPR Proceedings

On Thursday, June 4, 2015, the PATENT Act made it out of committee on a 16-4 vote after amendments were made to the bill that take direct aim at inter partes review proceedings. While there is still a long way to go before...more

Pretrial Motions Are Decided Before Trial

Helios Software, LLC, et al. v. Spectorsoft Corporation, C.A. No. 12-81-LPS -MPT, May 22, 2015 Stark, C. J. The court makes various pretrial rulings in advance of a June 15, 2015 jury trial. ...more

The “Totality of the Specification” Can Override a District Court’s Factual Findings - Enzo Biochem Inc. v. Applera Corp.

Giving little deference to the district court’s factual findings, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a district court’s claim construction in a long-running dispute relating to a patent for labeled and...more

USPTO makes changes to AIA post grant proceedings

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office will be making a series of rule changes to America Invents Act reviews. Some will be effective immediately, others will be implemented in phases. The rule changes are a direct response to...more

Board Signals Willingness to Admit Questionable Evidence in Close Cases - Fujian Newland Computer Co., Ltd., v. Hand Held Prods.,...

Addressing the standard for admitting evidence in inter partes review (IPR) proceedings, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO) Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) denied three motions to exclude as part of...more

Expert Is Not Permitted to Testify to Alternate Hypothetical Negotiation Dates Where No Hypothetical Negotiation Was Conducted for...

After the parties submitted expert reports in this patent infringement action, Ford objected to Eagle Harbor's damage expert's expected testimony and demonstratives. Ford objected to Eagle Harbor's evidence because it...more

Standard of Review for Claim Construction on Appeal

On January 20, 2015, the Supreme Court provided guidance on the standard of review for claim construction on appeal in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., No. 12-854. The Court held “[w]hen reviewing a district...more

Expert Witness Testimony Normally Improper for Preliminary Response - B/E Aerospace, Inc. v. Mag Aerospace Industries, LLC

Clarifying what is impermissible “new” evidence for a Patent Owner Preliminary Response in an inter partes review (IPR), the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) ordered that the patent owner’s exhibit, in the form...more

Serial Objections to Evidence Are Not Required if Supplemental Evidence Is Filed and Served

American Honda Motor Co., Inc. v. American Vehicular Sciences LLC - The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) concluded that a party need not renew an objection to evidence if...more

PTAB Applies Balancing Test in Deciding Motions to Seal Evidence

Search Am., Inc. v. TransUnion Intelligence, LLC - In an recent covered business method (CBM) patent review proceeding, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) denied the parties’...more

Independent Corroboration Required To Prove Conception

Microsoft Corp. v. SurfCast, Inc. - Addressing the requirements for antedating prior art, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) ruled all claims of a challenged patent unpatentable,...more

Warning: No Sandbagging Experimental Evidence

Baxter Healthcare Corp. v. Millenium Biologix, LLC - The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) has explained that an inter partes review (IPR) petitioner should fully support...more

Timeliness – The Devil Is in the Details (a.k.a. Rules)

GEA Process Engineering, Inc. v. Steuben Foods, Inc. - In an order issued by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board), the Board expunged exhibits from the records of five related cases on the basis of...more

Nexium District Court Takes Pioneering Approach to Preliminary Jury Charge

How does a court explain the complicated area of law at the intersection of patent settlements and antitrust law to a group of lay-jurors in the wake of Actavis? The district court’s approach to preliminary jury instructions...more

“Why, I declare” … Proper Use of Evidentiary Declarations under New (Post-AIA) Rule 37 C.F.R. 1.130

The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA) was signed into law on September 16, 2011. While the AIA alters U.S. patent practice in several ways, perhaps the most significant change brought about by the law is the switch from a...more

Rare Grant (in Part) of an IPR Motion to Exclude

Motions to Exclude Evidence have been one of the features of inter partes review practice that have, to date, had a less significant effect than expected. Very few motions have been granted, largely because the Board...more

No Surprises At Hearing; Demonstratives Must Only Contain Evidence of Record

In TriVascular, Inc. v. Shaun Samuels, IPR2013-00493, Paper 39 (September 2, 2014) the Board sustained a number of objections to the patent owner’s demonstrative exhibits....more

64 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 3

"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:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.
×