News & Analysis as of

Sanctions Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - July 2024 #3

Backertop Licensing LLC v. Canary Connect, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2023-2367, -2368, 2024-1016, -1017 (Fed. Cir. July 16, 2024) Our case of the week focuses on the inherent power of the district courts to investigate fraud and...more

Jones Day

PTAB Issues Sanctions for Attempted Extortion During “Settlement Negotiations”

Jones Day on

Director Vidal recently issued sanctions against OpenSky Industries (“OpenSky”) for attempted extortion during settlement negotiations and abuse of the IPR process for US Patent 7,725,759 and awarded $413,264.15 to VLSI...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - February 2024 #3

Promptu Systems Corporation v. Comcast Corporation, Appeal No. 2022-1939 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 16, 2024) Our Case of the Week focuses on a district court’s claim construction rulings in a patent case brought against Comcast...more

Weintraub Tobin

PTAB Finds Petitioner’s Failure to Disclose Relationship with Real Party in Interest Warrants Substantial Monetary Sanctions

Weintraub Tobin on

In Ventex Co., Ltd. v. Columbia Sportswear North America, Inc., IPR2017-00651 (PTAB Apr. 12, 2023) (per curiam), the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (the “Board”) found that petitioner Ventex Co., Ltd.’s (“Ventex) failure to...more

Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C.

PTAB Sanctions Non-Practicing Entity for Seeking to Abuse the IPR Process in Order to Extort Money

Last month, in OpenSky Industries v. VLSI Technology LLC, IPR2021-01064 (Oct. 4, 2022), the Director of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued a precedential decision regarding abuse of process. The decision...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Cloudy Skies: PTO Director Finds Abuse and Sanctionable Conduct

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO) Director issued a precedential opinion finding that filing an inter partes review (IPR) solely to extract payment in a settlement—without the intent to prosecute the IPR to completion—is...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Fee Award Appropriate for Trying to Refresh and Replay Case

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld an attorneys’ fees award after the patent owner brought successive patent infringement suits attempting “to refile to wipe the slate clean” after the first court was...more

Knobbe Martens

Board Has Final Say on Time Bar Decisions

Knobbe Martens on

ATLANTA GAS LIGHT COMPANY v. BENNETT REGULATOR GUARDS, INC. Before Newman, Lourie, and Stoll - Summary: Termination decision made by the Board in part based on the time-bar was “intimately related” to the institution...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Case - February 2022 #3

Alarm.com Inc. v. Hirshfeld, Appeal No. 2020-2102 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 24, 2022)- In an appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, the Federal Circuit addressed whether the ex parte reexamination...more

Jones Day

District Court Issues Sanctions for Patent Owner’s Shapeshifting Arguments at the PTAB

Jones Day on

Although infrequently awarded, district courts are empowered to issue sanctions for behavior at the PTAB that they deem “exceptional” under Octane Fitness. In Game and Technology Co., Ltd. v. Wargaming Group Limited,...more

Jones Day

Patent Owner Sanctioned For Ex Parte Communications

Jones Day on

Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.5(d), communications with a Board member regarding a specific proceeding are not permitted “unless both parties have an opportunity to be involved in the communication.” This prohibition, however, does...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - October 2018

Knobbe Martens on

IPR Petitioner’s Initial Identification of the Real Parties in Interest Is to Be Accepted Unless and Until Disputed by a Patent Owner - In Worlds Inc. v. Bungie, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2017-1481, -1546, -1583, the Federal...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

2017 and Early 2018 Supreme Court and Precedential Patent Cases From the Federal Circuit

Arbitration - Waymo v. Uber Technologies, 870 F.3d 1342 (Fed. Cir. 2017) - Waymo sued Uber and others for trade secret misappropriation and patent infringement. Uber contends that Waymo should be compelled to...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

2017 Supreme Court and Precedential Patent Cases From the Federal Circuit, With Some Significant Cases from 2016

Arbitration - Waymo v. Uber Technologies, 870 F.3d 1342 (Fed. Cir. 2017) - Waymo sued Uber and others for trade secret misappropriation and patent infringement. Uber contends that Waymo should be compelled to...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - August 2017

Knobbe Martens on

District Court Abused Discretion in Ignoring Federal Circuit Mandate to Reconsider Attorneys’ Fees Under Octane Fitness - In Adjustacam, LLC v. Newegg, Inc., Appeal No. 2016-1882, the Federal Circuit held that a district...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

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

In Regeneron v. Merus, a divided panel affirms a determination of unenforceability for violation of the duty of disclosure. What is interesting about the case is that neither the district court nor the majority reviewed...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Summaries of All Supreme Court and Precedential Federal Circuit Patent Cases Decided Since Jun. 1, 2016

This paper is based on reports on precedential patent cases decided by the Federal Circuit distributed by Peter Heuser on a weekly basis. ...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

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

Our report includes discussions of six of the precedential cases decided in the past week and will include the other three cases in next week’s report. In Aylus v. Apple, the panel finds prosecution disclaimer in a...more

Fish & Richardson

Kyle Bass Group Gets PTAB To Review 2 Celgene Patents

Fish & Richardson on

Yesterday the PTAB issued institution decisions in five Bass IPR petitions—denying institution of IPR2015-01086 against Biogen and instituting four IPR petitions against Celgene (IRP2015-01092, 01096, 01102, and 01103)....more

Foley & Lardner LLP

PTAB Refuses To Sanction Kyle Bass

Foley & Lardner LLP on

Many pharmaceutical companies have complained about the IPR petitions filed by Kyle Bass and the Coalition for Affordable Drugs against Orange Book-listed patents covering approved pharmaceutical products, but Celgene Corp....more

Fish & Richardson

PTAB Denies Sanctions Against Bass

Fish & Richardson on

On Friday September 25, the PTAB issued its decision on Celgene’s sanctions motions seeking dismissal of five IPRs filed by Kyle Bass and his hedge fund Coalition for Affordable Drugs VI. In June, Celgene filed sanctions...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP

PTAB to Consider Motion for “Abuse of Process” Sanctions Against Kyle Bass Hedge Fund IPR Petition

In a recent order, the Patent Trial and Appeals Board (PTAB) indicated that it will consider a motion for sanctions based on a claim of “abuse of process” in Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceedings filed by the Coalition for...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

IP Newsflash - June 2014

Federal Circuit Upholds Award of Sanctions for a “Frivolous” Patent Lawsuit - On June 5, 2014, the Federal Circuit affirmed the Southern District of New York’s decision to sanction Appellant and its attorneys for...more

23 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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