In an unusual bipartisan effort, Senator Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) and Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.) have introduced a pair of bills that seek to strengthen US patents by limiting permissible challenges. The bill led by Tillis,...more
Inter partes reviews (IPRs) are litigation-like procedures held before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) of the United States Patent and Trademark Office that are used to challenge the validity of patents. Typically,...more
Patent owners know that competitors can challenge their patents in the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). These challenges, known as inter partes reviews (IPRs), were created with the goal of improving patent quality....more
Disappointed with the final decision in your inter partes review (IPR) or post-grant review (PGR)? Under a new interim procedure, you may now seek review by the director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. The Office is...more
Inter partes reviews (IPRs)—and other post-grant patent review proceedings at the US Patent and Trademark Office—have survived another constitutional challenge. The Supreme Court held that the authority historically exercised...more
6/23/2021
/ Administrative Patent Judges ,
Appointments Clause ,
Arthrex Inc v Smith & Nephew Inc ,
Executive Branch ,
Executive Powers ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
SCOTUS ,
United States v Arthrex Inc ,
USPTO
The US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has now made another rules change to counter the charge that it is a patent “death squad.” The upcoming change to the rules governing inter partes reviews (IPRs) and post-grant...more
The Supreme Court recently held that a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) determination on whether a petition for an inter partes review (IPR) was filed on time is not appealable. The relevant provision of patent law...more
By denying rehearing of a judicial panel’s original decision in Arthrex v. Smith & Nephew, et al., the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals as a whole has effectively confirmed that inter partes reviews (IPRs) have been...more
Last week, we alerted you that the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals called all recent final inter partes review (IPR) decisions into question. Today, we alert you to increasing uncertainty in the wake of the Arthrex v. Smith...more
All final written decisions in inter partes reviews (IPRs) suffer from a constitutional defect according to a recent decision of the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals. The decision suggests that the constitutional problem may...more
The Patent Office has proposed new rules that may help patent owners avoid invalidation by amending patent claims in inter partes reviews (IPRs). When IPRs first became available, patent owners criticized the Patent Office...more
Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) proceedings, such as inter partes reviews (IPRs), have become popular alternatives to patent litigation in federal courts. Recent updates to the PTAB’s Trial Practice Guide provide welcome...more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has recently issued a precedential decision relating to an important but long unresolved issue that commonly arises during depositions in inter partes reviews and similar proceedings...more
In SAS Institute Inc., v. Iancu et al. (584 U.S. ___ (2018)), the U.S. Supreme Court addressed whether the Patent Trial and Appeals Board (PTAB) is required to decide the patentability of every claim challenged by a...more