Supplemental Examination: A Tool Worth Further Consideration - Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Six Things You Should Know About Inter Partes Review
JONES DAY TALKS®: PTAB Litigation Blog Reaches 500 Posts ... and the PTAB Reacts to COVID-19
Podcast: IP Life Sciences Landscape: Aiding Orange and Purple Book Patent Owners in Developing PTAB Survival Skills
On remand from the Supreme Court, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reconsidered the boundaries of the doctrine of assignor estoppel. The Federal Circuit found that the patent assignor was estopped from...more
Intel Corp. petitioned for six inter partes reviews (IPRs) challenging the validity of U.S. Patent No. 9,608,675, a patent directed to power management in wireless devices. In each proceeding, Intel and patent-owner Qualcomm...more
[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
Precedential Federal Circuit Opinions - In Re MAXPOWER SEMICONDUCTOR, INC. [ORDER] (2021-146, 9/8/21) (O’Malley, Reyna, Chen) - Reyna, J. Denying mandamus petition and dismissing appeal. The Court declined to...more
[co-author: Jay Bober, Summer Associate] The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return on investment for...more
Minerva Surgical, Inc. v. Hologic, Inc., No. 20-440: In the late 1990s, Csaba Truckai invented and patented a device to treat abnormal uterine bleeding. Truckai assigned his interest to his company, Novacept, which in turn...more
Next week is Court week. Readers may remember that, after the Court released the September calendar, we predicted that the submission trend would continue. Were we right? Sort of....more
The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return on investment for all stakeholders looking at the entire...more
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - BioDelivery Sciences Int’l, Inc. v. Aquestive Therapeutics, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2019-1643, -1644, -1645 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 29, 2019) - Our case of the week this week focuses on Section 314(d)—the...more
Federal Circuit Summary - Before Prost, Dyk, and Wallach. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. Summary: When the Federal Circuit holds that a combination of references...more
Assignor Estoppel Does Not Apply in the IPR Context - In Arista Networks, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2017-1525, 2017-1577, the Federal Circuit held that the plain language of 35 U.S.C. § 311(a) unambiguously...more
Federal Circuit Summary - Before Prost, Schall, and Chen. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: The plain language of 35 U.S.C. § 311(a) unambiguously leaves no room for assignor estoppel to apply in...more
The Board’s Final Written Decision Must Address All Grounds for Unpatentability Raised in a Petition for Inter Partes Review - In Adidas AG v. Nike, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2018-1180, 2018-1181, the Federal Circuit held that...more
Federal Circuit Summaries - Before Lourie, Dyk, and Hughes. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Summary: (1) The public use bar is not triggered by experimental use...more
Dell Inc. v. Acceleron, LLC (“Dell II”), No. 2017-1101 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 9, 2018) - On Tuesday, the Federal Circuit issued a precedential decision affirming the Board’s refusal to consider new arguments that had been made...more
In 2016, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit docketed more appeals from the US Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) than any other venue—a first in its over 30-year history. The post grant proceedings created by the...more
Is there a growing split in the Federal Circuit on the proper remedy where the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) fails to carry its burden? The recent precedential decision of In re Hodges, __ F.3d __, 2018 WL 817248...more
Core Wireless v. LG affirms the denial of summary judgment as to unpatentable subject matter, ruling that the asserted claims are directed to an improved user interface for computing devices, not to the abstract idea of an...more
Federal Circuit Summaries - Before Wallach, Chen, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nebraska. Summary: Reexaminations of patents confirming validity are not dispositive of...more
The Federal Circuit issued an en banc decision instructing the PTAB to assess patentability of amended claims in IPR proceedings without placing the burden of persuasion on the patent owner. Aqua Products, Inc. v. Matal, No....more
In yesterday’s decision in Aqua Products, Inc. v. Matal, No. 15-1177 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 4, 2017) (en banc), the Federal Circuit issued five opinions, spanning 148 pages, addressing the question of who bears the burden of proving...more
The Federal Circuit affirmed-in-part and reversed-in-part the PTAB’s final written decisions on Wasica’s tire pressure monitoring patents in Wasica Finance GmbH v. Continental Automotive Sys., Inc., No. 2015-2078 (Fed. Cir....more
Fetal diagnostic pioneer Ariosa Diagnostics lost its latest attempt to invalidate competitor Verinata Health’s U.S. Patent No. 8,318,430, “Methods of Fetal Abnormality Detection.” The USPTO’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board...more