Patent Trial and Appeal Board

News & Analysis as of

In re Nuvasive (Fed. Cir. 2016)

In a precedential decision the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded a Patent Trial and Appeal Board decision invalidating claims from Nuvasive's U.S. Patent No. 8,361,156 in an inter partes review instituted on a petition by...more

Lessons Learned from AIA Invalidity Proceedings in the Bio/Pharma Space

September 16, 2016, marked the fourth anniversary of the effective date for the invalidity proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) created by the America Invents Act (AIA). These new AIA...more

PTAB Life Sciences Report -- Part I December 2016

About the PTAB Life Sciences Report: Each month we will report on developments at the PTAB involving life sciences patents....more

PTAB Holds Oral Hearings In Tecfidera Patent IPR and Interference

On November 30, 2016, the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) held oral hearings in two different inter partes proceedings involving the Biogen Tecfidera® patent with the latest expiation date. First, it heard...more

Double-Checking the PTAB

By Bryan K. Wheelock, Principal The Federal Circuit’s docket is burgeoning with Patent Office appeals.  Three years ago there were 118 appeals from the USPTO pending before the Federal Circuit. Today there are 578.  The bulk...more

The Federal Circuit Confirms That It Will Review PTAB’s CBM Determinations … To A Certain Extent

The Federal Circuit has again addressed which types of patents are eligible for Covered Business Method (“CBM”) review before the Patent Trial & Appeals Board. Approximately one week after issuing the recent Unwired Planet v....more

IPR Update -- Is Reviewability of Time-Bar Institution Decisions Headed En Banc?

"It appears to me that en banc consideration is warranted." -- Judge Taranto (concurring in Click-To-Call Technologies, LP v. Oracle Corp.). "I write separately, however, to note that I believe the Supreme Court's...more

Celgene Asks PTAB to Reconsider Adverse Final Written Decision

On October 27, 2016, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued four final written decisions invalidating claims of U.S. Patent No. 6,045,501 (“the ’501 Patent”) and U.S. Patent No. 6,315,720 (“the ’720 Patent”) covering...more

Apple, Inc. v. Ameranth, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2016)

Computerized Restaurant Ordering Menu Patents Found to Be Directed to Unpatentable Subject Matter - The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reviewed a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decision in three...more

The Difficulty in Implementing an Idea Does Not Mean the Idea is Not Abstract

In Apple, Inc., v. Ameranth, Inc., [2015-1703, 2015-1704] (November 29, 2016), the Federal Circuit affirmed in part and reversed in part the PTAB’s subject matter eligibility determination of claims of U.S. Patent Nos....more

Perfect Surgical Techniques, Inc. v. Olympus America, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2016)

Diligence is a patent concept whose applicability was severely restricted under the changes in U.S. patent law created under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act. Diligence is important when determining whether an invention...more

PTAB Reverses Obviousness Finding After Remand

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) reversed its previous decision invalidating claims of a patent covering a coaxial cable connector after the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that the PTAB...more

Having the Last Word: Exploring the Good Cause Standard for Permitting Replies to Patent Owner Preliminary Responses

During the institution phase of a post-grant proceeding, the patent owner has the option of filing a preliminary response to the petition. 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.107(a), 42.207(a). The petitioner may then request leave to file a...more

Federal Circuit Broadly Affirms PTAB’s Determinations on Analogous Art, Motivation to Combine References and Obviousness of Claims

The level of deference the Federal Circuit gives to the Board’s IPR decisions has been surprising to many practitioners, considering the Court’s reputation for reversing district court decisions. The trend of deference to...more

PTAB Uses § 315(e)(1) Estoppel to Narrow IPR Scope

In two recent final written decisions (FWDs) rendered in inter partes review (IPR) proceedings, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) narrowed the scope of the proceedings by terminating the proceedings with...more

Federal Circuit Firmly Rejects PTAB Criteria For Covered Business Method Review - Brooks Kushman Post-Grant

In a recent panel decision that deviates from the Federal Circuit’s current tendency to defer to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s interpretation of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, the court vacated a final written...more

Proposed “Patent Agent Privilege” Promises Protection For Patent Practitioners And Clients

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”) recently proposed a patent-agent privilege that would bring needed consistency to the discovery phase of Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) proceedings....more

A Patent Does Not Become a CBM Patent Because its Practice Could Involve a Potential Sale of a Product or Service

In Unwired Planet, LLC, v. Google, Inc., [2015-1812] (November 21, 2016) the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded the PTAB’s final written decision in Covered Business Method Patent Review No. 2014-00006, that found the...more

Disclaimer of Financial Claims May Avoid Eligibility for CBM Review

In defining what patents qualify as covered business method (CBM) patents under 37 CFR § 42.301(a), the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) continues to reach diverse and divided panel decisions. Various PTAB cases...more

Reconsideration of Institution Decisions Is Also “Final and Nonappealable”

In an opinion addressing whether a decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) to reconsider a decision on institution is “final and nonappealable,” the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reaffirmed...more

Post Grant Review: § 112 and Eligibility Issues in Chemical and Life Sciences

Post Grant Review (PGR) petitions are on the rise, and nearly half of all petitions to date have challenged patents in Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry, or Chemical and Materials Engineering technology centers. We have...more

District Court Orders Additional Claim Construction Briefing After Plaintiff Appeared to Argue a Different Position in Other...

After the district court conducted a claim construction hearing (but before it issued an order), the district court stayed the litigation between Finjan and Symantec pending a decision by the PTAB regarding whether to...more

Federal Circuit Reins in PTAB’s Use of CBM Reviews

In Unwired Planet, LLC v. Google Inc., Case No. 2015-1812 (Fed. Cir. November 21, 2016), the Federal Circuit rejected the PTAB’s broad application of CBM reviews to claims that are merely “incidental” or “complementary” to...more

Swearing Behind A Reference With Reasonably Continuous Diligence

In Perfect Surgical Techniques, Inc. v. Olympus America, Inc., the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded a USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board decision in an Inter Partes Review proceeding, finding that the PTAB imposed too...more

How Much Did the Federal Circuit Narrow Eligibility for Covered Business Method Review?

Earlier this week, the Federal Circuit narrowed the types of patents eligible for covered business method (CBM) review. In Unwired Planet, LLC v. Google Inc., Case No. 15-1812, (Fed. Cir. Nov. 21, 2016) (“Unwired Planet”),...more

1,373 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 55
JD Supra Readers' Choice 2016 Awards

"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*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.

Already signed up? Log in here

*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.
×