The Supreme Court held this week that the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s (“USPTO”) appointment of Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) judges cannot be constitutionally enforced because the USPTO director does...more
Last Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in Minerva Surgical v. Hologic, thereby agreeing to resolve a long-running debate on patent law’s doctrine of assignor estoppel. Minerva Surgical has asked the Court to...more
In RPX Corp. v. Applications in Internet Time LLC, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) held in a precedential opinion that three inter partes reviews (“IPRs”) were time-barred under 35 U.S.C. § 315(b) because the...more
Are PTAB judges constitutional? This week the Supreme Court granted certiorari to answer this question.
In Arthrex v. Smith & Nephew, the Federal Circuit considered whether the appointment of administrative patent judges...more
10/16/2020
/ Administrative Patent Judges ,
Appeals ,
Appointments Clause ,
Arthrex Inc v Smith & Nephew Inc ,
Certiorari ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Officers of the United States ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
SCOTUS ,
Severability Doctrine
Yesterday, in Thryv, Inc. v. Click-To-Call Technologies LP, the Supreme Court held that Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) decisions regarding the time limit for filing inter partes reviews (“IPRs”) are not subject to...more
4/24/2020
/ § 314(d) ,
§ 315(b) ,
§314(a) ,
§314(b) ,
America Invents Act ,
Appeals ,
Dissenting Opinions ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Judicial Review ,
Non-Appealable Decisions ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
SCOTUS ,
Thryv Inc v Click-To-Call Technologies LP ,
Time-Barred Claims ,
Vacated
Last week, the Federal Circuit held that tribal sovereign immunity does not apply to inter partes review (IPR) actions instituted at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The decision, in Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe et al. v. Mylan...more
7/25/2018
/ Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
IP License ,
Mylan Pharmaceuticals ,
Native American Issues ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Pharmaceutical Industry ,
Pharmaceutical Patents ,
Sovereign Immunity ,
Tribal Governments
Last week, a Federal Circuit panel considered whether transferring patents to a tribal nation invoked the tribe’s sovereign immunity precluding inter partes review. The panel heard oral argument in Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe et...more
6/12/2018
/ Generic Drugs ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
IP License ,
Mylan Pharmaceuticals ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Pharmaceutical Industry ,
Pharmaceutical Patents ,
Sovereign Immunity ,
Tribal Governments
On April 24, 2018, in SAS Institute, Inc. v. Iancu, the Supreme Court held that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) must decide the validity of every patent claim challenged when it undertakes inter partes review under...more
In Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC, the United States Supreme Court held today, in a 7-2 decision, that the inter partes review process under the America Invents Act (AIA), 35 U.S.C. § 100 et...more
4/25/2018
/ Administrative Proceedings ,
America Invents Act ,
Article III ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Covered Business Method Proceedings ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Oil States Energy Services v Greene's Energy Group ,
Patent Invalidity ,
Patents ,
Post-Grant Review ,
Private Property ,
Public Property ,
Right to a Jury ,
SCOTUS ,
Seventh Amendment ,
USPTO