Real Party in Interest

News & Analysis as of

Failure to Name All Real Parties in Interest May Cause Termination of a Proceeding After Institution - Atlanta Gas Light Co. v....

Addressing the issue of identification of all real-parties-in interest in a petition, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (PTO’s) Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) vacated a decision to institute inter partes...more

ResCap Liquidating Trust Repurchase Lawsuit Survives Motion to Dismiss in Part:

On February 3, Judge Martin Glenn of the United States Bankruptcy Court of the Southern District of New York denied defendants’ motions to dismiss four adversary proceedings brought by the liquidating trust for Residential...more

Beneficiaries Lack Standing to Challenge Trustee's Actions in Bankruptcy Court

In a recent ruling on In re Land Securities Investors, Ltd., the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Colorado ruled that trust beneficiaries do not have standing to appear in a bankruptcy case even when the...more

Pro Se Not Welcome at PTAB

Shire Development LLC v. LCS Group, LLC - Denying a request from patent owner’s counsel to withdraw from an inter partes review (IPR), the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board)...more

Identifying the Real Party in Interest

Samsung Elecs. Co. v. Black Hills Media, LLC; Medtronic, Inc. v. Robert Bosch Healthcare Sys., Inc. - Two recent decisions from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) clarify the test for identifying the...more

Failure to Name Real Party in Interest Dooms Petition

In Paramount Home Entertainment Inc. v. Nissim Corp., IPR2014-00961, Paper 11 IPR2014-00962, Paper 11 (December 29, 2014), the Board denied institution of inter partes review of claims 1–27 of U.S. Patent No. 7,054,547 for...more

A "Proper" Party Isn't Necessarily A "Necessary" Party

What is the difference between a "proper" party and a "necessary" party"? Judge McGuire spelled out the difference early this week in Cape Hatteras Electric Membership Corp. v. Stevenson, 2014 NCBC 62....more

PTAB Expands Discovery for Inter Partes Review

GEA Process Engineering, Inc. v. Steuben Foods, Inc. - In a decision that has the potential to expand the scope of permissible discovery in inter partes reviews (IPRs) as well as other post-grant procedures under the...more

To Be A Real Party-In-Interest Entity Must Control or Fund the Litigation

Sipnet EU S.R.O. v. Straight Path IP Group, Inc. - In a final written decision of an inter partes review (IPR) determining that the petitioner showed by a preponderance of the evidence that challenged claims were...more

Additional Discovery Requires More Than Allegation that Something Useful Will be Found

In Petroleum Geo-Services, Inc. v. Westerngeco, L.L.C., IPR2014-01475, Paper 10 (November 26, 2014), the Board denied additional discovery on real party in interest because the patent owner could not...more

Rare Grant of Motion for Additional Discovery

In Zerto, Inc. v. EMC Corporation, IPR2014-01295, Paper 10 (November 25, 2014), the Board granted in part patent owner’s motion for additional discovery regarding the real party in interest...more

Proving Real-Party-In-Interest in IPR Remains Elusive

On difficult-to-prove issues in IPR proceedings, it is interesting to watch parties adapt to PTAB decisions, in the hopes of overcoming the long odds of success. One such issue is proving that a third party, whose involvement...more

Rare Grant of Additional Discovery to Identify

In Medtronic, Inc. v. Robert Bosch Healthcare Systems, Inc., IPR2014-00488, Paper 25 (November 5, 2014) the Board granted patent owner’s motion for additional discovery to determine the real party in interest....more

Additional Discovery Relating to Real Party in Interest

In VMware, Inc. v. Good Technology Software, Inc., IPR2014-01324, Paper 11 (October 20, 2014), the Board allowed the patent owner to move for additional discovery regarding the real party in interest, one of the few topics...more

Lightning Strikes and Patent Owner Gets Additional Discovery

In Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. v. Black Hills Media, LLC, IPR2014-00717, Paper 17, IPR2014-00735, Paper 17 (October 2, 2014), the patent owner presented sufficient information to call into question whether Google was also a...more

Late Addition of a Real-Party-in-Interest Allowed in Inter Partes Review

What if you come up short in naming all of the real-parties-in-interest to an inter partes review proceeding? Will the Board allow you to amend your petition? Four related IPR proceedings required the Board to address this...more

FTC PAE Study Would Collect Detailed Confidential Business Information From 25 PAEs

In the May 19, 2014 Federal Register, the Federal Trade Commission published a Notice and Request for Comments concerning its proposal ”to collect information about Patent Assertion Entity (‘‘PAE’’) organization, structure,...more

President Obama, Judge Rader, and Patent Trolls

President Obama and the Chief Judge of the Federal Circuit struck a one-two punch in the fight against patent trolls this week....more

18 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 1