In its recent decision in Ingenico Inc. v. IOENGINE, LLC, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s decision to allow Ingenico to introduce certain prior art at trial, finding that inter partes review (IPR) estoppel...more
On March 26, 2025, Acting Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Acting Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office Coke Morgan Stewart issued a memorandum that makes several significant...more
On January 14, 2025, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Lynk Labs, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., No. 2023-2346 (Fed. Cir.), affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s ruling that “a published patent...more
1/20/2025
/ America Invents Act ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Patent Applications ,
Patent Invalidity ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Prior Art ,
Samsung ,
USPTO
On April 19, 2024, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) that proposes rules regarding the exercise of discretion to determine whether to institute an Inter Partes...more
On April 16, 2024, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) regarding Director Review of Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decisions in America Invents Act (AIA)...more
United States Senators Thom Tillis (R-NC) and Chris Coons (D-DE) introduced the Patent Eligibility Restoration Act of 2023 (the “Act”) on June 22, 2023. The Act seeks to modify and clarify “patent eligibility jurisprudence...more
On April 3, 2023, the Federal Circuit issued an opinion in Ironburg Inventions Ltd. v. Valve Corp., addressing the scope of what invalidity grounds are subject to estoppel pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2) and the burden of...more
On December 20, 2019, the Precedential Opinion Panel (POP) of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued its decision in IPR2018-01039, addressing “What is required for a petitioner to establish that an asserted...more
1/13/2020
/ Administrative Appeals ,
Final Written Decisions ,
Hulu ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Litigation Strategies ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Pleading Standards ,
Precedential Opinion ,
Preponderance of the Evidence ,
Printed Publications ,
Prior Art ,
PTAB Precedential Opinion Panel (POP) ,
Totality of Evidence
An important set of factors the Patent Trial and Appeal Board considers when deciding whether to institute inter partes review concerns the filing of multiple petitions challenging the same patent. Part I of this two-part...more
In view of the increasing number of petitions for inter partes review filed before the Patent and Trial Appeal Board since its inception more than six years ago, the PTAB has increased its scrutiny of so-called “serial”...more
On February 7, 2019, in Momenta Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, the Federal Circuit dismissed an appeal brought by a petitioner in an inter partes review (IPR) for lack of standing and mootness because...more
2/13/2019
/ Article III ,
Biosimilars ,
Bristol-Myers Squibb ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Momenta ,
Mootness ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Pharmaceutical Industry ,
Pharmaceutical Patents ,
Standing