Latest Posts › Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding

Share:

PTAB Issues Guidance on Discretionary Denials

In a recent newsflash, we discussed the USPTO’s withdrawal of its 2022 memorandum that detailed how the PTAB would exercise its discretion to deny petitions for inter partes review and post-grant review. New guidance from the...more

USPTO Withdraws Fintiv Memo on Discretionary Denials in Post-Grant Proceedings

On February 28, 2025, the USPTO announced that it was rescinding former Director Vidal’s 2022 memorandum on discretionary denials by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The 2022 memorandum effectively narrowed the application...more

USPTO Director: Invalidity Judgment by District Court Does Not Foreclose Inter Partes Review

In a sua sponte review, USPTO Director Kathy Vidal continued her refinement of the PTAB’s “discretionary denial” practice. Specifically, the Director vacated the Board’s decision to deny institution in Volvo Penta of the...more

Timing is Everything: Accused Infringer’s IPR Victory Estops Its Own Prior Art Invalidity Defenses, but Does Not Estop Plaintiff...

Inter partes review (IPR) proceedings can give rise to statutory and collateral estoppel. But these two bases for estoppel attach at different times, which can lead to asymmetrical outcomes in related district court...more

Agreement Not to Raise Duplicative Arguments in District Court Key to Avoiding Discretionary Denial of IPR Petition

In the last two years, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board has issued two precedential decisions (in NHK and Fintiv) that set forth the board’s test for determining whether to deny an inter partes review (IPR) petition based on...more

Strength of Objective Indicia from Prior Litigation Overcomes Strong Obviousness Challenge in IPR

In a recent inter partes review (IPR), a patent owner overcame a facially persuasive obviousness challenge by relying on evidence from an earlier litigation to establish objective indicia of nonobviousness. In RTI...more

Court Narrows Invalidity Case Through IPR Estoppel, but Federal Circuit’s Shaw Decision Keeps Some Arguments Alive

The Federal Circuit’s decision in Shaw Indus. Grp., Inc. v. Automated Creel Sys., Inc., 817 F.3d 1293 (Fed. Cir. 2016) raised the possibility that the inter partes review (IPR) estoppel of 35 U.S.C. § 315(e) might not do much...more

IP Newsflash - January 2016 #2

SUPREME COURT CASES - U.S. Supreme Court Will Review PTAB’s Claim Construction Standard - The U.S. Supreme Court has decided to review the claim construction standard used by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)...more

IP Newsflash - January 2016

SUPREME AND FEDERAL COURT CASES - U.S. Supreme Court Denies Writ to Overturn Application of the Kessler Doctrine - The U.S. Supreme Court denied software developer’s SpeedTrack writ to overturn the Federal...more

IP Newsflash - February 2015

FEDERAL CIRCUIT CASES - PTAB’s Broadest Reasonable Interpretation Standard Affirmed by Fed. Circuit in First Ever IPR Appeal - On Wednesday, February 4, 2015, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC)...more

IP Newsflash - January 2015 #3

FEDERAL CIRCUIT CASES - Akin Gump Wins Summary Judgment of Non-Infringement - Akin Gump obtained a significant victory on summary judgment for HTC and AT&T in a patent infringement case against Adaptix, Inc., an...more

11 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