Inter Partes Review Proceedings

News & Analysis as of

The PTAB Allows Discovery "Of Persons Who Provided Direction To, Or Had The Authority To Provide Direction To, Petitioner Or Its...

In IPR2014-01201, Patent Owner ThermoLife International, LLC sought discovery regarding whether Purus Labs, Inc., a company related to the Petitioner John's Lone Star Distribution, Inc., should have been identified as a real...more

PTAB Issues Subpoenas in Two IPR Proceedings

To date, the PTAB has sparingly used its power to issue subpoenas in inter partes review proceedings. In two recent cases, Marvell Semiconductor, Inc. v. Intellectual Ventures I LLC, (IPR2014-00553) and LG Chem, Ltd. v....more

Nearly Expired Is Not the Same as Expired: The Board Clarifies Claim Construction Standards for Inter Partes Review - Apple, Inc....

Addressing the standard to be applied for claim construction during inter partes review (IPR) proceedings, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (PTO) Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) declined to create an...more

PTO Formally Issues First Set of New Changes to PTAB Rules, Including Increased Page Limits for Petitioner Replies and Patent...

The U.S. Patent & Trademark Office (PTO) has issued several rule amendments that it refers to as “ministerial changes” to procedures for post-grant proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), including Inter...more

BBQ Patent Must Face The Heat: Petition Is Not Barred When Filed Within 1 Year of the Filing of a Waiver of Service in the...

On October 13, 2014, The Brinkman Corporation filed a petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent 8,381,712 directed to a barbecue grill that allows simultaneous gas grilling and charcoal-fueled grilling. ...more

IPR Privity Analysis Includes Post-Complaint Period - VMWare, Inc. v. Good Technology Software, Inc.

Clarifying the privity requirement for inter partes review (IPR) petitions, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) explained that privity should be determined looking at the...more

Filing Waiver of Service Triggers One-Year IPR Bar Date - The Brinkmann Corporation v. A&J Manufacturing

Addressing the issue of standing to present a petition, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) granted institution of an inter partes review (IPR), finding that the petition filed within one year of filing waiver...more

Mere Receipt of a Copy of the Complaint Does Not Invoke the One-Year Bar Rule - Petroleum Geo-Services, Inc. v. Westerngeco LLC

Addressing the meaning of “defendant” for purpose of the one-year bar rule, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) explained that being served with a third party subpoena in...more

Biosimilar Makers Turn to IPRs before Litigation under the BPCIA

A number of biosimilar makers have turned to inter partes review (IPR) proceedings in order to litigate the validity of patents that cover their proposed products prior to submission of their biosimilar applications to FDA. ...more

Design Patent Case Digest: Munchkin, Inc. and Toys “R” US, Inc. v. Luv N’ Care, LTD.

Decision Date: April 21, 2014 and April 14, 2015 - Court: Patent Trial and Appeal Board and U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit - Patents: D617,465 - Holding: Claimed design is obvious and therefore...more

No Special Rules Regarding Consideration of Expert Declarations in IPR Proceedings - In re International Business Machines Corp.

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

USPTO Implements Quick Fixes to AIA Review Rules

On March 27, 2015, the director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) announced several quick fixes in response to public comments on proposed revisions to the rules for inter partes review (IPR), post grant review...more

Patent Owner Must Produce Documents That Are Inconsistent with Its Positions

In IPR2014-00727, Petitioner C&D Zodiac, Inc. seeks review of U.S. Patent No. 8,590,838 owned by B/E Aerospace, Inc. The '838 patent relates to a "spacewall" lavatory. In connection with the IPR proceeding, the Petitioner...more

Board Clarifies When Expanded Panel Can Consider an IPR Issue

In the aftermath of the decision by an expanded panel of PTAB judges in Target Corp. v. Destination Maternity Corp. (deciding, in a 4-3 decision, that both joinder of issues and joinder of parties is allowed in inter partes...more

District Court Denies Motion to Stay Pending Inter Partes Review Where Trial Was Less Than a Year Away and Defendant's Previous...

Presidio Components, Inc. ("Presidio") filed a complaint against American Technical Ceramics Corp. ("ATC") asserting a claim for patent infringement. ATC filed a motion to stay the case pending PTO review of the...more

PTAB Estops Follow-On Petition for Inter Partes Review Based New Combinations of Prior Art Raised in Earlier Petition

Dell, Inc. v. Electronics & Telecommunications Research Institute, IPR2015-00549, Paper 10 (P.T.A.B. Mar. 26, 2015) - The Board recently added a decision denying inter partes review in Dell, Inc. v. Electronics &...more

Keeping Up With Kyle Bass

In the few weeks since I first wrote about Kyle Bass and the Coalition for Affordable Drugs he formed to challenge Orange Book-listed patents that he believes “have little value other than to drive up prescription drug...more

No More Soup For You – PTAB Rejects Second IPR Petition Under 35 U.S.C. § 325(d)

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board recently denied an IPR petition under 35 U.S.C. § 325(d) because the petitioner’s arguments were substantially similar to those it made in an earlier IPR petition. Both petitions involved...more

Petitioners Must Present Sufficient Evidence to Establish Inherency

Last Friday the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) denied four Sandoz Inc. petitions for instituting inter partes review (IPR) of U.S. 8,455,524 (IPR2015-00005), U.S. 7,612,102 (IPR2015-00006), U.S. 7,659,290...more

Benefits of Showing Discovery as “Routine” Instead of “Additional”

The PTAB issued an order granting in part a request for discovery by an IPR petitioner. IPR2014-00727 - C&D Zodiac, Inc. v. B/E Aerospace, Inc. ...more

Strategies for Pharma Companies Facing Bass-Like Challenges in IPR Proceedings

Kyle Bass is at it again. On April 20, 2015, Bass filed his sixth inter partes review (IPR) Petition against a patent covering Pharmacyclics, Inc.’s cancer drug, IMBRUVICA®. Then, on April 22, 2015, Bass filed his seventh IPR...more

30 Months of IPR Practice – By the Numbers

UntitledWelcome to Volume 9 of our IPR-PGR Report. After 30 months of IPR practice, some trends are taking shape. Overall, the percentage of petitions put into trial has gradually decreased, down to 76% this quarter, from a...more

Is The Deck Stacked Against Patent Owners In The PTAB? [Video]

Two years after the creation of the America Invents Act post-grant proceedings, many patent owners are facing an uphill battle when attempting to defend their intellectual property before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board...more

District Court Dismisses Action after Patent Is Transferred to President of Company

After Plaintiff Pi-Net International, Inc. ("Pi-Net") brought suit against Defendants Focus Business Bank and Bridge Bank, N.A. for patent infringement, the Patent and Trademark Office initiated an Inter Partes Review ("IPR")...more

Boston Scientific Files Second IPR Petition Against UAB Patent

Boston Scientific Corporation (“Boston Scientific”) filed a petition with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board on April 10, 2015 requesting inter partes review of U.S. Patent No. 6,266,563 (“the ’563 Patent”). The petition...more

604 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 25

All the intelligence you need, in one easy email:

Great! Your first step to building an email digest of JD Supra authors and topics. Log in with LinkedIn so we can start sending your digest...

Sign up for your custom alerts now, 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.
×