Patent Trial and Appeal Board

News & Analysis as of

Boston Scientific Files IPR Petitions Against Nevro

Boston Scientific filed two petitions with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board on May 14, 2015 requesting inter partes review of Nevro’s U.S. Patent No. 8,359,102. The petitions were assigned Case Nos. IPR2015-01203 and...more

PTAB Rejects Samsung's Bid to Join Its Own Previously Initiated IPR Proceeding As An Unjustified "Second Bite At The Apple"

In IPR2015-00821, Petitioner Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc., sought to join its Petition with a recently initiated IPR proceeding involving the same patent, parties, and counsel. The...more

PTAB Finalizes “Quick Fix” Changes to IPR/PGR Procedure

The PTAB issued its revised IPR Rules today, finalizing the “quick fix” changes it forecasted in late-March. There are numerous changes that have been made to IPR practice, many of them ministerial in nature. We focus here on...more

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

Facts Govern Real Party-in-Interest Determinations - TRW Automotive US LLC v. Magna Electronics Inc.; Paramount Home Entertainment...

Addressing the real-party-in-interest (RPI) requirement of 35 U.S.C. § 312(a) in two separate proceedings, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) emphasized the fact-dependent...more

Final "Ministerial" Rule Amendments for Practice Before the PTAB

On May 19, 2015, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office published its first "Final Rules" package of amendments to the Rule of Practice before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board ("PTAB"). Keeping with Director Lee's...more

New Amendments to USPTO Post-Grant Regulations

On May 19, 2015, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued a final rule amending its regulations that apply to post-grant proceedings. These new rules deal with ministerial changes such as increasing page...more

Biogen MA, Inc. v. Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research (Fed. Cir. 2015)

The Federal Circuit affirmed a decision by the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 146 pursuant to changes in the statute provided by the...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

Conventional Use of Computer Not Enough to Overcome Alice - Westlake Services, LLC v. Credit Acceptance Corp.; Regions Financial...

In two separate decisions involving an § 101 analysis of subject-matter eligibility of business methods patents (CBMs), the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) found that the...more

Specific Application Will Not Avoid Ineligibility Unless Required by the Claims - Int’l Securities Exchange LLC v. Chicago Board...

Addressing the patent eligibility of claims from two challenged covered business method patents (CBMs), the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) found the challenged claims to be...more

IP Newsflash - May 2015 #3

FEDERAL CIRCUIT CASES - Federal Circuit Reverses Summary Judgment of Noninfringement Under § 271(e)(1) for Consideration of Certain Post-FDA-Submission Activities, But Expresses Skepticism About Infringement...more

Payment Information Does Not Necessarily Make a CBM - SEGA of Am., Inc. v. Uniloc USA, Inc

Addressing the issue of what qualifies as a covered business method (CBM) under the America Invents Act (AIA), the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (PTO’s) Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) denied institution of...more

PTAB Clarifies Protocol for Expanded Post-Grant Panels

Today the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) posted on its website Revision 14 of its Standard Operating Procedure 1 (SOP 1). SOP 1 covers the assignment of Administrative Patent Judges to merits panels, interlocutory...more

Non-Claimed Elements Cannot Transform an Abstract Idea - Agilysys, Inc. et al. v. Ameranth, Inc.

Addressing unpatentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. §101, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) concluded that additional elements not recited or required by the claim, such as a non-limiting preamble, cannot...more

Financial Product or Service Is Not Just for Financial Service Industry - Samsung Electronics v. Smartflash LLC; Motorola Mobility...

Addressing the requirements for instituting a covered business method (CBM) review in three decisions, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) explained that the “financial...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

Analysis of Inter Partes Review and Post-Grant Review in the Life Sciences Industry Through First Quarter 2015

The recently established inter partes review (IPR) and post-grant review (PGR) of the America Invents Act have been in the spotlight lately, especially now that the life sciences industry has begun to utilize these...more

Indefiniteness Before the PTAB [Video]

Recent years have seen an increase in the number of post-grant decisions on the issue of indefiniteness. What does this mean for patent owners and petitioners? Attorneys Seth Northrop and Cyrus Morton discuss the Patent Trial...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

The PTAB Explores Estoppel in New Representative Decision

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) recently announced the addition of its March 26, 2015 decision in Dell, Inc. et al. v. Electronics and Telecomms. Res. Inst., IPR2015-00549 (“the ‘549 IPR”) to its online list of...more

524 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 21

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.
×