Patent Trial and Appeal Board

News & Analysis as of

IP Buzz - July 2014

In this issue: - IPR Spotlight Series: What to Do When the PTAB Denies Your Petition to Institute IPR - Public Comments on AIA Trial Proceedings – the USPTO is Listening - Versata v. SAP: PTAB Decision...more

Motion to Stay Pending CBM Review Granted Where Non-Practicing Entity Did Not Seek Preliminary Injunction

Boku, Inc. ("Boku") filed a CBM petition with the PTAB seeking review of the patentability of Plaintiff's U.S. Patent No. 7,273,168 (the "'168 patent"). The petition challenged all claims of the '168 patent on grounds that...more

Insights from a Recent Panel on Navigating AIA Trials

On July 14, 2014, the Bar Association of the District of Columbia presented "Navigating AIA Trials at the USPTO," a panel discussion on the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA) trials, which took place at the D.C. office of...more

Public Comments on AIA Trial Proceedings – the USPTO is Listening

As mentioned in a previous article, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) held a series of roundtables throughout the United States this spring to solicit public feedback on AIA trials. Having received some feedback during...more

New Guidance From the Federal Circuit on Motions to Stay Litigation Pending a PTAB Proceeding

In VirtualAgility Inc. v. Salesforce.com, Inc., No. 2014-1232 (July 10, 2014), the Federal Circuit issued its first opinion directed to the issue of when it is appropriate to grant a stay of a district court patent...more

IPR Update -- The First Pharma IPR Decisions

Late last month, while many of us were getting ready to attend the BIO International Convention in San Diego, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board ("Board") issued four related inter partes review opinions, marking what many...more

Case Alert -- Federal Circuit Reverses District Court Denying Stay Pending Covered Business Method Review

On July 10, 2014, the Federal Circuit issued an opinion in VirtualAgility Inc. v. Salesforce.com, Inc., in which it reversed the district court’s order denying Salesforce’s motion to stay the district court suit pending...more

The Duty Of Candor: Letting The Truth Shine

“Three things cannot hide for long: the Moon, the Sun, and the Truth.” The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) relies on the truth coming to light to resolve disputes in post-grant proceedings in a “just, speedy, and...more

Federal Circuit Orders Stay Pending Completion of CBM Review

Applying section 18(a)(1) of the America Invents Act (AIA) to an issue of first impression, a divided panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a district court, ordering a stay of the district court...more

Deputy Directory Lee Announces the Request for Written Comments to Help Improve PTAB Proceedings

In a post from yesterday entitled "Help Improve our AIA Trial Proceedings," Michelle Lee, Deputy Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Deputy Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, announced on...more

Walker Digital v. Google: Stay Pending CBM Review Denied Where Discovery Was Complete and Stay Would Prejudice the Plaintiff

After the PTAB instituted a CBM review of the patents-in-suit, Google sought a stay of the litigation pending resolution of CBM review by the PTAB. The district court explained that "[c]ourts consider four factors when...more

Federal Circuit Favors Stay of Litigation Pending CBMR

In Virtualagility Inc. v. Salesforce.com, Inc., [2014-1232] (July 20. 2014), the Federal Circuit reversed the district court’s denial of a stay of an infringement suit pursuant to AIA § 18(b)(1) pending disposition of a...more

IP Newsflash - July 2014

Federal Circuit Orders Stay of District Court Proceedings Pending Post-Grant Review - In its first decision on stays pending post-grant review under the AIA, the Federal Circuit has ordered a Texas district court to...more

The Duty to Indemnify Does Not Create Privity

Apple Inc. v. Achates Reference Publishing, Inc. - In the final written decisions of two related inter partes reviews (IPRs) concerning patents in the same family, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial...more

Know Your Objections: Notices, Motions and Discussions with the PTAB

ABB, Inc. v. ROY-G-BIV Corp. - In a final written decision, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) commented that evidence can only be excluded by properly serving a notice and...more

Board Cuts Patent Owners Time in Half to Stay on Schedule

In Reloaded Games, Inc. v. Parallel Networks, LLC, IPR2014-00950, Paper 9 (July 8, 2014), Petitioner filed a second petition for inter partes review covering claims for which trial was not instituted in its first petition for...more

Board Allows Rare Motion for Additional Discovery

In a relatively rare grant of a Motion For Additional Discovery, in Atlanta Gas Light Co. v. Bennett Regulator Guards, Inc. (IPR2013-00453,, Paper 40), Patent Owner sought additional discovery pertaining to its contention...more

The PTAB Was Right the First Time

EMC Corp. v. PersonalWeb Technologies, LLC - In a final written decision in an inter partes review (IPR), the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) determined that under the broadest reasonable interpretation claim...more

Expert Testimony Must Be Supported by Evidence

Corning Inc. v. DSMIP Assets B.V. - The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued final written decisions in 10 inter partes review (IPR) challenges. Although early IPR decisions generally have sustained...more

More Details, Details

Integrated Global Concepts, Inc. v. J2 Global, Inc., IPR2014-01027, Paper 4 (July 7, 2014), the Board granted the petition a filing date, but required the petition to fix the claim charts, which may not “include arguments,...more

Instruction Not to Answer on Relevance Grounds Improper in IPR Depositions

iStock_000001758213XSmallIn Dynamic Drinkware v. National Graphics, IPR 2013-00131, Patent Owner’s counsel prevented Petitioner from questioning a witness by instructing the witness not to answer questions on the ground of...more

Patent Owner Failed to Justify Joining Five IPR’s

In Ford Motor Co. v. Cruise Control Technologies LLC, IPR2014-0281, Paper 19, (July 2, 2014) the Board denied patent owner’s motion to join five proceedings U.S. Patent No. 6,324,463. The Board ducked the question of whether...more

PTAB Permits Substitution of New Claims in Challenged Patent

International Flavors & Fragrances Inc. v. The United States - In a move unprecedented in any inter partes review (IPR), the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) allowed the patent owner—the U.S. Department of...more

Testimony of Expert Witness: Key Patentability Arguments in Inter Partes Review

SATA GmbH & Co. KG v. Anest Iwata Corp. - In a final written decision, in an inter partes review (IPR), the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) rejected a patent owner’s motion to...more

A Party Needs Compelling Reasons for Discovery

Permobil, Inc. v. Pride Mobility Products Corporation, IPR2013-00407, Paper 43 (July 2, 2014), the Board denied the patent owner’s motion to compel production evidence of copying of the products embodying patent owner’s...more

190 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 8