News & Analysis as of

Patent Validity Post-Grant Review

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Federal Circuit Finds Written Description Support for Narrow Claim Range via Disclosure of Broader Ranges, Vacates PTAB Decision

The Federal Circuit recently vacated a PTAB decision that claims of an “e-cigarette” patent were unpatentable for lack of written description under 35 U.S.C. § 112. The question on appeal was whether a claimed range was...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2021 Decisions

[co-author: Jamie Dohopolski] Last year, the continued global COVID-19 pandemic forced American courts to largely continue the procedures set in place in 2020. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was no...more

Goodwin

Issue 33: PTAB Trial Tracker

Goodwin on

QUESTIONS REGARDING THE APPLICATION OF THE FINTIV FACTORS REMAIN - The Board has increasingly exercised its discretion to deny petitions in recent months, mainly due to the application of the Fintiv factors due to parallel...more

Goodwin

The PTAB Trial Tracker

Goodwin on

The availability of post-grant proceedings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has changed the face of patent litigation. This monthly digest is designed to keep you up-to-date by highlighting interesting PTAB,...more

Jones Day

Return to Sender: PTAB Denies Government Contractor IPRs

Jones Day on

After the Supreme Court’s 2019 decision in Return Mail, Inc. v. United States Postal Service, 139 S. Ct. 1853 (2019), held that federal agencies are not “persons” eligible to challenge a patent at the PTAB, the government was...more

Knobbe Martens

PTAB’s New Informative Decisions Remind IPR Petitioners of Need for Well-Developed Rationale for Combining References

Knobbe Martens on

On December 11, 2019, the PTAB designated two additional decisions as “informative.”  Such informative decisions are not binding on subsequent panels, but are meant to provide guidance on recurring issues encountered by PTAB...more

Ladas & Parry LLP

Return Mail Inc. v. United States Postal Service

Ladas & Parry LLP on

On June 20, 2019, the United States Supreme Court held that government entities could not be considered “persons” entitled to challenge patents owned by others before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)....more

Sunstein LLP

State Universities Are Not Immune From Challenges to Their Patents at the USPTO

Sunstein LLP on

Under constitutional principles of United States law, states generally enjoy sovereign immunity. This immunity, enshrined in the 11th amendment of the US Constitution, bars private parties from bringing lawsuits against the...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP

Courts Eliminate Rights and Immunities of Governments in PTAB

Recently, the Federal Circuit issued a series of decisions that address the rights and immunities that the federal and state government have when they become party to a post-grant proceeding before the Patent Trial and Appeal...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

PTAB Strategies and Insights - June 2019: Supreme Court Eliminates Government as a Party Who Can File AIA Action at PTAB

In Return Mail, Inc. v. U.S. Postal Serv., 17-1594, Justice SOTOMAYOR wrote for the majority to overturn a Federal Circuit decision that the U.S. Postal Service had standing to petition for covered business method review. The...more

Jones Day

Federal Agencies May Not Challenge Patents in AIA Post-Issuance Proceedings

Jones Day on

The Supreme Court ruled in Return Mail that a federal agency is not a "person" who may challenge an issued patent in inter partes review, post-grant review, or CBM review under the AIA. In its 6–3 decision in Return Mail,...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Return Mail v. Postal Service: The Supreme Court Rules the Federal Government May Not Petition for Institution of Post-Issuance...

In a 6-3 opinion authored by Justice Sotomayor, the Supreme Court held that the Federal Government is not a “person” capable of petitioning the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) to institute patent review proceedings...more

Williams Mullen

Supreme Court Holds that Government Agencies May Not Use AIA Proceedings to Challenge Patents

Williams Mullen on

On June 10, 2019 the United States Supreme Court held in Return Mail, Inc. v. United States Postal Service, 587 U.S. ____ (2019) that agencies of the federal government cannot challenge the validity of a patent via USPTO...more

Snell & Wilmer

Supreme Court: Federal Government Is Not Permitted to Challenge Patents Under the AIA

Snell & Wilmer on

In a recent 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court held that the U.S. Postal Service and other federal agencies are prohibited from challenging the validity of patents post-issuance under the proceedings created by the Leahy-Smith...more

Stinson LLP

Supreme Court Decides Federal Government May Not Challenge Patent Validity in the Patent Office Under the AIA

Stinson LLP on

On June 10, 2019 in a 6-to-3 decision, Return Mail v. United States Postal Service, No. 17–1594, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that, based on principles of statutory interpretation, a federal agency is not a “person” that...more

Fish & Richardson

Supreme Court Bars AIA Patent Challenges by the Government in Return Mail Decision

Fish & Richardson on

The Supreme Court ruled Monday in a 6-3 decision that federal agencies may not file America Invents Act (AIA) petitions at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). Return Mail, Inc. v. United States Postal Service et al.,...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

High Court Says Federal Agencies Cannot Seek AIA Patent Challenges

Earlier this week, the United States Supreme Court reversed the Federal Circuit’s finding that the government is a “person” eligible to petition for post-issuance AIA review proceedings. This 6-3 decision, Return Mail, Inc....more

Weintraub Tobin

Supreme Court: Federal Government Cannot Challenge Patents In PTAB

Weintraub Tobin on

The validity of a patent can be challenged in four different types of proceedings: ex parte reexamination, inter partes review, post grant review, and covered business method review. An ex parte reexamination is initiated by...more

Cooley LLP

Alert: Supreme Court: Federal Agencies Cannot Seek Review of an Issued Patent Under the AIA

Cooley LLP on

The US Supreme Court’s decision in Return Mail, Inc. v. U.S. Postal Service removes the ability of federal agencies to seek post-issuance review of a US patent under the inter partes, covered business method or post-grant...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Federal Agencies Ruled Not ‘Persons,’ May Not Petition for AIA Reviews

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Supreme Court has now held that a federal agency is not a “person” under the America Invents Act (AIA). Therefore, a federal agency cannot be a petitioner seeking review under the various AIA patent review procedures....more

McCarter & English, LLP

“Oh Yes, Wait A Minute, Mr. Postman” — Supreme Court Says Post Office (And The Government) Can’t Challenge Patents In Patent...

Who — or what — is a “person” authorized under the America Invents Act (“AIA”) to challenge the validity of patents in Patent Office proceeding? That is the question that the Supreme Court answered on Monday, holding that the...more

Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP

Is the government a person? Sometimes, but not for AIA post-grant patent proceedings

On June 10, the US Supreme Court ruled 6-31 that the Federal Government is not a “person” entitled to institute post-grant proceedings - inter partes review, post-grant review, or covered business method review (CBM review) -...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

U.S. Government Cannot Bring AIA Patent Challenges

Foley & Lardner LLP on

On June 10, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the U.S. government cannot challenge the validity of a U.S. patent in any AIA review proceeding (inter partes review, post-grant review, or covered business method review)....more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

2019 Report: Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB - Summaries of Key 2018 Decisions: SAS Institute v. Iancu, 138 S.CT. 1348...

SAS sought an inter partes review (IPR) of ComplementSoft’s patent. In its petition, SAS alleged that all of the patent’s claims were unpatentable. The PTAB determined to institute trial on some, but not all, of the...more

Fenwick & West LLP

JTEKT v GKN: Lacking Standing, Competitor Cannot Appeal PTAB IPR Ruling

Fenwick & West LLP on

The Federal Circuit further restricted a petitioner’s ability to appeal a decision by the Patent and Trademark Appeal Board upholding the validity of a patent. The court this month found in JTEKT v. GKN Automotive that a...more

38 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

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