Using Expert Witnesses in FCRA Cases - FCRA Focus
Chemical Engineering Expert Witness Experience & Discovery – IMS Insights Podcast Episode 48
Podcast: Science in the Courtroom
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 328: Listen and Learn -- Expert vs. Lay Witness Testimony (Evidence)
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 159: Listen and Learn -- Evidence: Expert vs. Lay Witness Testimony
Podcast: What Witness Preparation Means
Podcast: Seven Witness Preparation Mistakes Lawyers Make
Podcast: Raise Your Right Hand, Miss Lillian
Episode 015: Confessions of a Business Appraiser: A Conversation with Chris Mercer
Precedential and Key Federal Circuit Opinions - WISCONSIN ALUMNI RESEARCH FOUNDATION v. APPLE INC. [OPINION] (2022-1884, 8/28/2024) (Prost, Taranto, and Chen) - Prost, J. The Court affirmed two final judgments of the...more
Be an Expert: Precedential PTAB Decision on Conclusory Expert TestimonyStutti TilwaA recent precedential decision from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) may serve as a warning for those parties who plan on relying on...more
A recent precedential decision from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) may serve as a warning for those parties who plan on relying on expert declarations in their inter partes reviews (“IPR”). On August 24, 2022, the...more
An inter partes review (or IPR) of a patent is a trial proceeding conducted by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) when there is a challenge to patentability. The procedure for conducting IPRs took effect in 2012 and...more
Last month in Cornell Research Foundation, Inc. v. Vidal, the Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board's determinations in six inter partes review proceedings that invalidated the challenged claims for being...more
[co-author: Jamie Dohopolski] 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...more
The regulations governing discovery in an inter partes review ("IPR") proceeding do not provide for the same methods of discovery available in a patent infringement lawsuit. As such, when opportunities for discovery...more
As discussed in our previous post, one of the most critical tasks for Patent Owners during the Inter Partes Reviews (“IPR”) discovery period is deposing the Petitioner’s expert. Since IPR depositions are treated differently...more
As we demonstrated in our own successful appeal, Arendi S.A.R.L. v. Apple Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2016), a petition for inter partes review (“IPR”) may fail when an expert declaration lacks detailed explanation. An expert’s...more
Before Reyna, Hughes, and Stoll. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. TQ DELTA, LLC v. CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. Summary: Findings of fact at the PTAB must be supported by substantial evidence, and conclusory expert...more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) recently issued an Order that illustrates the circumstances in which a party may obtain additional discovery in an inter partes review (IPR). In Apple Inc. v. Singapore Asahi Chemical...more
Addressing the scope of Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) guidelines that prohibit lawyers from conferring with their witness during cross-examination, the PTAB designated as precedential a 2014 decision permitting lawyers...more
The PTAB recently denied petitioner’s request for rehearing of a decision denying institution of inter partes review, rejecting the argument that the Board’s denial was based on an erroneous analysis of the “non-exhaustive”...more
The PTAB panel in Focal Therapeutics, Inc. v. SenoRx, Inc., Case IPR2014-00116 (PTAB July 21, 2014) (Paper 19), provided certain clarifications with regard to the ability to confer with witnesses during examination. This...more
In an ongoing inter partes review (IPR) proceeding, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (the “Board”) denied Petitioner Nestlé Healthcare Nutrition, Inc.’s request to cross examine two expert witnesses after Patent Owner...more
Depositions are an important, yet sometimes overlooked, part of AIA proceedings, such as inter partes review (“IPR”) trial proceedings. It is important to understand that IPR depositions differ in significant ways – both in...more
As follow up to last month’s article on lack of motivation to combine, another just released Board decision in IPR2016-00972 (Paper 18) again found for patent owner because the petition failed to provide a proper motivation...more
Federal Circuit Summaries - Before Moore, Wallach, and Stoll. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: The PTAB is entitled to weigh the credibility of expert witnesses, and attorney argument cannot be...more
The Perspectives on the PTAB Newsletter is designed to be a valuable resource for all stakeholders in the global patent arena throughout the patent life cycle. To that end, articles will provide perspectives from both sides...more
Challenging the validity of a patent through the courts of Europe and the United States can be a time-consuming and expensive process. Oppositions at the European Patent Office (EPO) and US post-grant cancellation...more
In instituting IPR of a particular patent, the PTAB found that the patent was not entitled to its priority claim, thus opening it up to invalidity attacks. However, because the PTAB’s decision was not being challenged in the...more
On January 10, 2017, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (the “Board”) ruled that Petitioner’s inability to depose, and therefore cross-examine, Patent Owner’s expert could warrant striking the expert’s declaration....more
We are pleased to share this Perspectives on the PTAB newsletter. Its content is directed toward providing information and analysis of the decisions made by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. We hope that this newsletter...more
In a non-precedential opinion, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit declined to direct the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) to create a particularized written standard for consideration of inter partes...more
In an order regarding deposition times for expert witnesses in three related inter partes reviews (IPRs), the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) ruled that total deposition time...more