Latest Posts › Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding

Share:

Is the government a person? Sometimes, but not for AIA post-grant patent proceedings

On June 10, the US Supreme Court ruled 6-31 that the Federal Government is not a “person” entitled to institute post-grant proceedings - inter partes review, post-grant review, or covered business method review (CBM review) -...more

Stayin' alive: What’s next for IPRs after Oil States and SAS

On April 24, 2018, the US Supreme Court decided two important cases that directly impact inter partes reviews (IPRs) before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), and patent litigation as a whole. In Oil States Energy...more

An Arrow in the Quiver of Patent Owners: Federal Circuit Decides That Not All Aspects of PTAB’s Institution Decisions Are "Final...

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has decided that patent owners may appeal the decisions of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) regarding the timeliness of inter partes review petitions under 35 U.S.C. §...more

Federal Circuit Shifts the Burden to Amend Claims at PTAB…For Now: Aqua Products, Inc.  v. Matal

On October 4, 2017, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a divided en banc decision in Aqua Products, Inc. v. Matal, vacating the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) final written decision insofar as it...more

Solidifying Claim Construction in Inter Partes Review – Cuozzo Allows Patent Office to Govern the Inter Partes Review Process

On June 20, the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC v. Lee, 2016 WL 3369425 (June 20, 2016) upheld the Patent Office’s long-held policy of construing a patent claim according to its broadest...more

5 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