Podcast - The Basic Rules for Closing Argument
Closing Argument: Opportunity and Challenge
Podcast - Impeaching with a Deposition
Winning Cases on Legal Issues Before and During Trial | Texas Appellate Law Podcast
Opening Statements: The Prohibition Against Argument
Proof in Trial: University of Louisville
Work This Way: A Labor & Employment Law Podcast - Episode 6: Digital Forensics & Protecting Trade Secrets with Clark Walton
Dealing with Evidence of Time, Distance and Speed
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 417: Listen and Learn -- Authentication of Evidence
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 410: Listen and Learn -- Relevance Issues (Evidence)
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 225: Listen and Learn -- Authentication of Evidence
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 214: Listen and Learn -- Relevance Issues (Evidence)
California Employment News: Synthesizing Evidence in a Workplace Investigation (Part 3)
Evidence Preservation: Handling the Issues in New York and New Jersey
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 352: Listen and Learn -- Best Evidence Rule
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 182: Listen and Learn -- Policy Exclusions (Evidence)
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 177: Listen and Learn -- Best Evidence Rule
Facing a Deposition: Tips and Strategies
The Presumption of Innocence Podcast: Episode 3 - The Science of Modern Digital Forensics
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 326: Listen and Learn -- Multiple Hearsay
On June 6, 2024, the PTAB issued a Final Written Decision concluding claims 1-6 of U.S. Patent No. 8,899,655 B1 (“the ’655 patent”) unpatentable. Yita LLC v. MacNeil IP LLC, IPR2023-00172, Paper 70 (PTAB Jun. 6, 2024)...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a Patent Trial & Appeal Board obviousness decision, finding that disclosure in the prior art of all recited claim elements across multiple references, without more,...more
In VLSI Technology LLC v. Intel Corporation, No. 22-1906 (Fed. Cir. 2023), VLSI sued Intel for infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,523,373 (the “’373 patent”) and U.S. Patent No. 7,725,759 (the “’759 patent”). After a jury...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial & Appeal Board’s decisions finding one set of challenged claims patentable and another set of challenged claims in the same patent unpatentable. The...more
In AO Kaspersky Lab v. Open Text Inc., the PTAB denied inter partes review after determining that a screenshot of a GitHub repository was insufficient to establish that a whitepaper posted to that repository qualified as a...more
In Elekta Limited v. Zap Surgical Systems, Inc., No. 21-1985 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 21, 2023), the case addresses the interplay between findings related to motivation to combine and reasonable expectation of success in determining...more
In Jodi A. Schwendimann, fka Jodi A. Dalvey, v. Neenah, Inc., Avery Products Corporation, No. 2022-1333, 2022-1334, 2022-1427, 2022-1432 (Fed. Cir. October 6, 2023) (“Opinion”), the case addresses whether there was...more
Director Jason A. Fitzsimmons and Counsel Richard A. Crudo will present the “Developments in IPR Estoppel” webinar on Tuesday, December 5, 2023, at 1:00 PM ET. The possibility of being estopped from asserting prior art in...more
Volvo Penta of the Americas, LLC v. Brunswick Corp., Appeal No. 2022-1765 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 24, 2023) In its only precedential patent case of the week, the Federal Circuit held the Patent Trial and Appeal Board erred in...more
MEDTRONIC, INC. v. TELEFLEX INNOVATIONS S.A.R.L. Before Moore, Lourie, and Dyk. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board - Summary: Federal Circuit confirms low bar for evidence corroborating prior inventorship...more
Technical experts play a key role in patent litigation, including in PTAB litigation. Indeed, experts are often the only witnesses to provide testimony in PTAB proceedings, and final written decisions often hinge on which...more
Parties before the PTAB should be careful to submit supplemental materials as soon as practicable. In Extractiontek Sales v. Gene Pools Tech., the PTAB denied a Patent Owner’s motion to submit a deposition transcript from a...more
The US Patent & Trademark Office Director affirmed and designated as precedential a Patent Trial & Appeal Board (Board) decision denying institution of an inter partes review (IPR) petition where the expert declaration...more
Google petitioned for IPR of two patents owned by IPA. Each of the asserted grounds relied on the Martin reference. Martin lists as authors the two inventors of the challenged patents and a third person, Dr. Moran. During...more
As part of the recovery from the global COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit took steps to return to normal operations. It began requiring live oral arguments in August 2022 and, by November,...more
While creativity has its place in advocacy, it can be taken too far. The Petitioner learned this lesson the hard way in Unified Patents Inc. v. American Patents LLC, IPR2019-00482, Paper 132 (P.T.A.B. Aug. 3, 2022). In this...more
In Salesforce.com, Inc. v. WSOU Investments, LLC d/b/a Brazos Licensing and Development, the Board denied institution of inter partes review of a patent directed to providing content to a limited display terminal (e.g., a...more
In a recent opinion by the Federal Circuit, Auris Health, Inc. v Intuitive Surgical Operations, Inc., Case 2021-1732, the panel split on the weight of general industry skepticism in an obviousness analysis and split on...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
In two related inter partes review proceedings, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board granted a petitioner’s motion to exclude the declaration of an inventor because the patent owner failed to make him available for...more
In conjunction with the release of the firm's year-in-review report, our speakers will discuss the recent cases surrounding IPR estoppels, evidentiary issues, and recovery, which notably highlight the interplay between the...more
Parallel proceedings before the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) are a common feature of district court litigation, and it is common for the factual records to overlap between these tribunals. As a result, questions...more
Imagine sitting in a conference room with your carefully crafted set of questions for a deposition, and you are exploring the basis for an opposing expert’s opinions. But instead of giving thoughtful answers, the expert...more
USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decisions in 2021 show that antedating a prior-art reference remains a viable option to knock out a ground in an inter partes review (IPR) petition—patent owners were successful in...more
Love it or hate it, ignore the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) at your peril. The introduction of the PTAB as part of the America Invents Act over ten years ago has forever changed patent litigation. In its first...more