The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) continues to play a pivotal role in shaping the intellectual property landscape. In 2024, several developments affecting PTAB practice emerged, from new rulemaking at the USPTO to key...more
2/4/2025
/ §315(e) ,
Administrative Procedure Act ,
America Invents Act ,
Appeals ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Director of the USPTO ,
Final Rules ,
Intellectual Property Litigation ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Ownership ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Prior Art ,
Rulemaking Process ,
Section 102 ,
Statistical Analysis ,
Statutory Interpretation ,
Technology ,
USPTO
On November 15, 2023, Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Kathi Vidal designated as precedential the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) final written decision in Penumbra, Inc. v. RapidPulse,...more
11/20/2023
/ America Invents Act ,
Anticipation ,
Appeals ,
Claim Construction ,
Final Written Decisions ,
Intellectual Property Litigation ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Applications ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Prior Art ,
USPTO
Intel filed three IPR petitions against Qualcomm’s ’949 patent, which is directed to “boot code” in a multi-processor system. Apple, who was not a party to any of the IPRs, uses Intel’s baseband processors in certain iPhone...more
2/17/2023
/ Article III ,
Final Written Decisions ,
Indefiniteness ,
Intel ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Invalidity ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Prior Art ,
Qualcomm ,
Standing
Varian filed two petitions for IPR of BMI’s ’096 patent, which the Board instituted. Elekta filed copycat petitions and successfully joined Varian’s two instituted IPRs. A previously filed, parallel ex parte reexamination on...more
2/16/2023
/ Article III ,
Ex Partes Reexamination ,
Expert Testimony ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Lack of Jurisdiction ,
Obviousness-Type Double Patenting (ODP) ,
Parallel Proceedings ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Standing ,
USPTO
Atlanta Gas petitioned for inter partes review of Bennett’s ’029 patent. The Board initially rejected Bennett’s argument that Atlanta Gas was time barred from petitioning for inter partes review under 35 U.S.C. § 315(b) and...more
2/16/2023
/ § 314(d) ,
§ 315(b) ,
Failure To Disclose ,
Final Written Decisions ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Jurisdiction ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Prior Art ,
Real Party in Interest ,
Remand ,
Time-Barred Claims ,
Vacated
As part of the recovery from the global COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit took steps to return to normal operations. It began requiring live oral arguments in August 2022 and, by November,...more
2/8/2023
/ § 314(d) ,
§ 315(b) ,
35 U.S.C. §315(e)(1) ,
Abuse of Discretion ,
Administrative Patent Judges ,
Administrative Procedure Act ,
America Invents Act ,
Anticipation ,
Apple ,
Appointments Clause ,
Arbitrary and Capricious ,
Arthrex Inc v Smith & Nephew Inc ,
Article III ,
Artificial Intelligence ,
Broadcom ,
Burden of Persuasion ,
Burden of Production ,
Confidentiality Agreements ,
Consent Order ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Covenant Not to Sue ,
Director of the USPTO ,
Doctrine of Equivalents ,
Estoppel ,
Evidence ,
Ex Partes Reexamination ,
Expert Testimony ,
Failure To Disclose ,
Federal Vacancies Reform Act ,
Final Written Decisions ,
Forum Selection ,
Google ,
Indefiniteness ,
Intel ,
Intellectual Property Litigation ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
International Trade Commission (ITC) ,
Inventions ,
Inventors ,
Joint Inventors ,
Jurisdiction ,
Lack of Jurisdiction ,
Likelihood of Confusion ,
Motion to Amend ,
Motion to Terminate ,
Obviousness ,
Obviousness-Type Double Patenting (ODP) ,
Parallel Proceedings ,
Patent Act ,
Patent Applications ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Invalidity ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Prosecution ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patent-Eligible Subject Matter ,
Patents ,
Post-Grant Review ,
Preliminary Injunctions ,
Preponderance of the Evidence ,
Prior Art ,
Qualcomm ,
Real Party in Interest ,
Remand ,
Section 101 ,
Section 112 ,
Separation of Powers ,
Standing ,
Statutory Authority ,
Sua Sponte ,
Substantial Evidence ,
Testimony ,
Time-Barred Claims ,
Trademark Application ,
Trademark Infringement ,
Trademark Litigation ,
Trademark Registration ,
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ,
Trademarks ,
USPTO ,
Vacated ,
Written Descriptions
In conjunction with the release of the firm's year-in-review report, speakers will offer case summaries and analysis of the significant 2022 appellate rulings discussed in the report. Topics of the featured intellectual...more
1/23/2023
/ Consent Order ,
Continuing Legal Education ,
Estoppel ,
Expert Testimony ,
Final Written Decisions ,
Intellectual Property Litigation ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
International Trade Commission (ITC) ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Invalidity ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Prior Art ,
Standing ,
Webinars
[co-author: Jamie Dohopolski]
Last year, the continued global COVID-19 pandemic forced American courts to largely continue the procedures set in place in 2020. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was no...more
2/9/2022
/ § 314(d) ,
35 U.S.C. §315(e)(1) ,
Absolute Intervening Rights Doctrine ,
Abuse of Discretion ,
Administrative Patent Judges ,
Administrative Procedure Act ,
America Invents Act ,
Appeals ,
Appointments Clause ,
Arbitrary and Capricious ,
Article of Manufacture ,
Assignor Estoppel ,
Burden of Proof ,
Claim Construction ,
Collateral Estoppel ,
Commercial Success ,
Confidential Information ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Demand Letter ,
Denial of Institution ,
Design Patent ,
Director of the USPTO ,
Dismissals ,
Doctrine of Prosecution Disclaimer ,
Due Process ,
Equitable Estoppel ,
Estoppel ,
Evidence ,
Ex Partes Reexamination ,
Executive Branch ,
Executive Powers ,
Federal Rules of Evidence ,
Final Written Decisions ,
Forum Selection ,
FRCP 52(c) ,
GATT ,
Inferior Officers ,
Intellectual Property Litigation ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Inter Partes Reexamination ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
International Trade Commission (ITC) ,
Intervening Acts ,
Inventions ,
Issue Preclusion ,
Judicial Review ,
Lack of Authority ,
Lack of Jurisdiction ,
Likelihood of Success ,
Minerva Surgical Inc. v Hologic Inc. ,
Motion for Summary Judgment ,
Motivation to Combine ,
Nexus ,
Non-Disclosure Agreement ,
Nonobvious ,
Obviousness ,
Ornamental Design ,
Parallel Proceedings ,
Patent Applications ,
Patent Filings ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Prosecution ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patent Validity ,
Patents ,
Petition for Writ of Certiorari ,
Pharmaceutical Patents ,
Post-Grant Review ,
Pre-GATT ,
Preliminary Injunctions ,
Principle Officers ,
Printed Publications ,
Prior Art ,
Real Party in Interest ,
Remand ,
Reversal ,
Rule 36 ,
Scope of Review ,
SCOTUS ,
Section 325(d) ,
Sua Sponte ,
Substantial Evidence ,
Totality of Evidence ,
United States v Arthrex Inc ,
USPTO ,
Vacated ,
Writ of Mandamus
Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox invites you to a webinar, "Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2021 Decisions," on Thursday, February 17, 2022.
In conjunction with the release of the firm's...more
2/9/2022
/ Administrative Patent Judges ,
Assignor Estoppel ,
Collateral Estoppel ,
Continuing Legal Education ,
Design Patent ,
Equitable Estoppel ,
Forum Selection ,
Intellectual Property Litigation ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
International Trade Commission (ITC) ,
Issue Preclusion ,
Minerva Surgical Inc. v Hologic Inc. ,
Nonobvious ,
Patent Applications ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Invalidity ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Prosecution ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Printed Publications ,
United States v Arthrex Inc ,
Webinars
The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return on investment for all stakeholders looking at the entire...more
9/1/2021
/ America Invents Act ,
Claim Construction ,
Design Patent ,
Evidence ,
Extrinsic Evidence ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Intrinsic Evidence ,
Inventions ,
Nexus ,
Nonobvious ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Prosecution History ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Prior Art ,
Remand ,
Reversal ,
Substantial Evidence ,
USPTO ,
Utility Patents ,
Vacated ,
Written Descriptions
In Qualcomm Inc. v. Intel Corp., the Federal Circuit ruled that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board violated patent owner Qualcomm’s rights under the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) by not giving it notice and a chance to...more
8/5/2021
/ Administrative Procedure Act ,
Burden of Proof ,
Claim Construction ,
Intel ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Oral Hearings ,
Patent Invalidity ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Petition For Rehearing ,
Prejudice ,
Prior Art ,
Qualcomm ,
Remand ,
Sua Sponte ,
Vacated
[co-author: Jay Bober, Summer Associate]
The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return on investment for...more
8/2/2021
/ Administrative Patent Judges ,
Administrative Procedure Act ,
Appointments Clause ,
Burden of Proof ,
Claim Construction ,
Denial of Institution ,
Evidence ,
Executive Branch ,
Executive Powers ,
Intel ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
International Trade Commission (ITC) ,
Oral Hearings ,
Parallel Proceedings ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Invalidity ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patent Validity ,
Patents ,
Petition For Rehearing ,
Prejudice ,
Prior Art ,
Qualcomm ,
Remand ,
SCOTUS ,
Statutory Deadlines ,
Stipulations ,
Sua Sponte ,
United States v Arthrex Inc ,
USPTO ,
Vacated
New Vision Gamingi touches on an interesting forum-selection issue currently before the Federal Circuit in at least one other case. The issue is the enforceability of a forum-selection clause in an agreement between parties...more
6/7/2021
/ Final Written Decisions ,
Forum Selection ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Inventions ,
Inventors ,
IP License ,
Patent Invalidity ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Remand ,
Vacated
The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return on investment for all stakeholders looking at the entire...more
6/3/2021
/ Claim Construction ,
Estoppel ,
Final Written Decisions ,
Forum Selection ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
International Trade Commission (ITC) ,
Inventions ,
Inventors ,
IP License ,
L'Oreal ,
Obviousness ,
Parallel Proceedings ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Invalidity ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Philip Morris ,
Post-Grant Review ,
Prior Art ,
Remand ,
RJ Reynolds ,
Section 337 ,
USPTO ,
Vacated ,
Written Descriptions
In Raytheon Techs. Corp. v. General Electric Co., 20-1755 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 16, 2021) (precedential), the Federal Circuit issued a rare reversal of a PTAB final determination of obviousness because the principal reference used...more
[co-author: Yuke Wang, Patent Agent]
The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return on investment for all...more
4/27/2021
/ Claim Construction ,
Evidence ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patent Validity ,
Patents ,
Petition for Writ of Certiorari ,
Prior Art ,
Reversal ,
Split of Authority
When oral arguments commence in United States v. Arthrex, Inc., No. 19-1434 (U.S.) on Monday, March 1, William H. Milliken, a director in Sterne Kessler’s Trial & Appellate Practice Group, will be live tweeting updates from...more
2/26/2021
/ 5 U.S.C. § 7513(a) ,
Administrative Patent Judges ,
Appointments Clause ,
Arthrex Inc v Smith & Nephew Inc ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Director of the USPTO ,
Inferior Officers ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Oral Argument ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Polaris Innovations Ltd v Kingston Technology Co ,
Principle Officers ,
SCOTUS ,
Severability Doctrine ,
Tenure ,
United States v Arthrex Inc
Samsung sought inter partes review of M&K’s U.S. Patent No. 9,113,163. The Board held all claims unpatentable. M&K appealed, arguing that the Board erred by relying on references that do not qualify as prior art printed...more
2/26/2021
/ Administrative Procedure Act ,
Anticipation ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Printed Publications ,
Prior Art ,
Remand ,
Substantial Evidence ,
Vacated
[co-author: Kathleen Wills]
The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return on investment for all...more
2/25/2021
/ Administrative Procedure Act ,
Anticipation ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Mergers ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Printed Publications ,
Prior Art ,
Real Party in Interest ,
Remand ,
Substantial Evidence ,
Time-Barred Claims ,
Vacated
FanDuel petitioned for inter partes review (IPR) of certain claims of Interactive Games’ patent. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board instituted review and found all but dependent claim 6 to be unpatentable as...more
The inventor on the patent, Dr. Cheriton, was employed by Cisco as a technical advisor and chief product architect at the time he filed the application that led to the patent. Dr. Cheriton assigned all rights to the...more
RPX petitioned for inter partes review of ChanBond’s ’822 patent. The Board instituted the IPR and determined that RPX did not show any challenged claim to be unpatentable. RPX appealed the final written decision to the...more
3/14/2019
/ Appeals ,
Article III ,
Estoppel ,
Injury-in-Fact ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Non-Practicing Entities ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Petition for Writ of Certiorari ,
Reputational Injury ,
Right To Appeal ,
SCOTUS ,
Standing ,
Statutory Rights
In 2018, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit docketed close to 600 appeals from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). That is the second highest number since starting to hear post-American Invents Act...more
2/28/2019
/ § 315(b) ,
Adverse Judgments ,
Appeals ,
Article III ,
Assignor Estoppel ,
Burden of Proof ,
Burden-Shifting ,
Claim Construction ,
Collateral Estoppel ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Doctrine of Prosecution Disclaimer ,
Estoppel ,
Final Written Decisions ,
Injury-in-Fact ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Inventors ,
Non-Appealable Decisions ,
Non-Practicing Entities ,
Obviousness ,
Oil States Energy Services v Greene's Energy Group ,
Partial Institution ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Owner Preliminary Response ,
Patent Ownership ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Precedential Opinion ,
Printed Publications ,
Prior Art ,
Private Property ,
Public Rights Doctrine ,
Real Party in Interest ,
Right to a Jury ,
Right To Appeal ,
SAS Institute Inc. v Iancu ,
Section 101 ,
Section 102 ,
Section 103 ,
Seventh Amendment ,
Sovereign Immunity ,
Standing ,
Time-Barred Claims
By a majority of 7-2, the Supreme Court has ruled that inter partes review is a valid exercise of statutory authority vested in the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC,...more
4/25/2018
/ Article III ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Due Process ,
Franchises ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Oil States Energy Services v Greene's Energy Group ,
Patent Validity ,
Patents ,
Post-Grant Review ,
Private Property ,
SCOTUS ,
Seventh Amendment ,
Takings Clause
The Supreme Court has ruled by a narrow majority of 5-4 that the Patent Office’s regulation allowing for partial institution decisions in inter partes review is foreclosed by the text of 35 U.S.C. § 318(a). SAS Institute Inc....more
4/25/2018
/ Administrative Procedure ,
America Invents Act ,
Chevron Deference ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Discretionary Functions ,
Final Written Decisions ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Judicial Review ,
Non-Appealable Decisions ,
Patent Ownership ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
SAS Institute Inc v Matal ,
SCOTUS ,
USPTO