News & Analysis as of

Patents America Invents Act

Todd Walters Participates in Fireside Chat with Chief Judge of PTAB

On Tuesday, September 12, 2017, the Patent Trial & Appeal Board (PTAB) conducted a special “Boardside Chat” webinar with Chief Judge David Ruschke. Todd Walters represented the American Bar Association Intellectual Property...more

PTAB Chief Judge Discusses Post-grant Review Statistics at IPO Meeting

The value of the post-grant review programs (post-grant review, inter partes review, and covered business methods review) has been debated since these provisions were enacted as part of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act in...more

PTAB Establishes Criteria Governing Follow-On Petitions For AIA Post Grant Proceedings

by Brooks Kushman P.C. on

General Plastic Industrial Co. v. Canon Kabushiki Kaisha, Case IPR2016-01357 (PTAB Sept. 6, 2017)- A familiar strategy in inter partes (“IPR”) review proceedings under the America Invents Act (“AIA”) is for petitioners to...more

8 Ways To Avoid Inter Partes Review Estoppel

by Morrison & Foerster LLP on

Inter partes review has become an enormously popular method of challenging patents. One important downside of filing for IPR, however, is that, if the petitioner loses, it faces an estoppel that could prevent it from raising...more

USPTO Maintains Standard for Indefiniteness in Rare Precedential Opinion

by Orrick - IP Landscape on

Decision on Appeal, Ex parte McAward et al., No. 2015-006416 (P.T.A.B. August 25, 2017) (Judges Linda E. Horner, Annette R. Reimers and Nathan A. Engels) - The Supreme Court’s decision in Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig...more

Fresh From the Bench: Precedential Patent Cases From the Federal Circuit

Today the Circuit agreed to hear en banc Nantkwest v. Matal,in which the panel had reversed a district court decision that had rejected the PTO’s position that applicants who appeal a district court must pay the PTO’s legal...more

Stronger Patents Act: 5 Significant Proposed Changes to Inter Partes Reviews

by Revision Legal on

Recently, Senator Christopher Coons (D-Del) introduced the STRONGER Patents Act of 2017. So far, this is the only legislation introduced in this Congress addressing any sort of patent reform. The proposal would significantly...more

In re McAward (PTAB 2017)

Patent law can be apparently inconsistent, particularly where claim construction is concerned. For example, claim construction standards that apply in district court are not the same standards that the U.S. Patent and...more

Sovereign Immunity Cannot Protect Patent Co-Owned by Private Party

by McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing for the first time the issue of whether an inter partes review (IPR) may proceed where one of the co-owners was entitled to sovereign immunity under the 11th Amendment, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) held...more

[Webinar] Prior Art: Understanding and Attacking Prior Art Rejections - September 6, 10:00am ET

Join us for a compare and contrast discussion on what constitutes prior art in the United States and in Europe, and how to respond to rejections over that art. Relying on over sixty years combined prosecution experience...more

3 Key Takeaways: Navigating the Post-Grant Landscape

Kilpatrick Townsend’s John Alemanni, Allison Dobson, Matthew Holohan, and Wab Kadaba recently presented on navigating the Post-Grant landscape. Here are three key takeaways from their presentation. The STRONG Patents Act...more

Changes to PTAB Practice Proposed by STRONGER Patents Act of 2017

by Knobbe Martens on

The STRONGER (Support Technology & Research for Our Nation’s Growth and Economic Resilience) Patents Act of 2017 was recently introduced in the Senate by a bipartisan group led by Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.) and co-sponsored...more

Federal Circuit Criticizes PTAB for Failing to Properly Weigh Objective Evidence of Non-Obviousness

by Pepper Hamilton LLP on

The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals again vacated a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) panel decision for failing to properly evaluate “objective evidence of non-obviousness” and remanded the case for determinations...more

Is the Pendulum About to Swing Back?

In 2012, the American Invents Act created Inter Partes review (“IPR”) and related proceedings that allowed parties to request that the Patent Office institute a trial to determine the patentability of issued claims. Over the...more

Congressman Lamar Smith and Diverse Industry Groups Support Federal Circuit en banc Review of AIA’s On-Sale Bar

by White & Case LLP on

The recent Federal Circuit ruling that the America Invents Act (AIA) on-sale bar renders a patent invalid if the invention was sold prior to the effective filing date of the patent, even if the sale did not publicly disclose...more

IPR and CBM Statistics for Final Written Decisions Issued in June 2017

by Finnegan – AIA Blog on

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board issued 50 Final Written Decisions in June. It was a relatively difficult month for patent owners, with the Board cancelling 555 (80.32%) of the instituted claims while declining to cancel...more

To Be or Not to Be a Micro Entity

by Baker Donelson on

When filing a patent application with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), certain applicants have the option to designate “small entity status” or “micro entity status.” Claiming either small or micro...more

Helsinn Healthcare S.A. v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc.

by Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Helsinn Healthcare S.A. v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc., 855 F.3d 1356, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 7650 (Fed. Cir. May 1, 2017) (Circuit Judges Dyk, Mayer, and O’Malley presiding; Opinion by Dyk, J.) (appeal from D.N.J.,...more

Supreme Court Corner Q2 2017

by DLA Piper on

Impression Products, Inc. v. Lexmark International, Inc. PATENT – Decided: May 30, 2017 - HOLDING: All patent rights of a product are exhausted when the product is sold, "regardless of any restrictions the patentee...more

PTAB Can Rely on New Evidence Introduced by Petitioner in its Reply

by Pepper Hamilton LLP on

In a decision last month, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit gave petitioners in AIA proceedings yet another weapon to invalidate patents – by affirming a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decision that relied,...more

AIA Does Not Override 28 USC § 1447(d) Reviewability Bar

by McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled that provisions in the America Invents Act (AIA) related to federal courts’ jurisdiction over patent claims do not override 28 USC § 1447(d)’s limit on appellate review of...more

Cloud9 Technologies LLC v. IPC Systems, Inc. (PTAB 2017)

Petitioner Cloud9 requested covered business method (CBM) review of IPC's U.S. Patent No. 8,189,566 before the USPTO's Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Due to the claims of the '566 patent not reciting a financial element, the...more

A Court Divided: Judges File Widely Varying Opinions on CBM Review Eligibility

by McDermott Will & Emery on

The standards used by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) for determining what qualifies as a covered business method (CBM) patent under AIA § 18(d)(1) and 37 CFR 42.301(a) have not always been consistent (see, for...more

Trademark and Patent Applicants Opting for a District Court Appeal Must Pay PTO’s Attorney Fees

On June 23, 2017, the Federal Circuit held that, whether they win or lose, patent applicants who appeal adverse PTAB decisions directly to a district court must pay the PTO’s attorneys’ fees. Patent applicants seeking...more

STRONGER Patents Act of 2017 Likely Too Heavy Lift for Congress

by Orrick - IP Landscape on

It may be late July, but the impending Congressional recess has not lessened potential interest by lawmakers in patent reform. On June 21, 2017, Sen. Christopher Coons (D-Delaware) introduced Senate Bill 1390, entitled the...more

716 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 29
Cybersecurity

"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 using*

Already signed up? Log in here

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