In less than a month, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) has dramatically reformed its policies and procedures for exercising its discretion to deny institution of AIA post-grant proceedings. First, on...more
On February 10, 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a decision in Kroy IP Holdings, LLC v. Groupon, Inc., reversing and remanding a district court ruling that had dismissed Kroy’s patent...more
2/28/2025
/ Appeals ,
Burden of Proof ,
Collateral Estoppel ,
Intellectual Property Litigation ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Invalidity ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents
On January 14, 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a precedential decision in Lynk Labs, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., No. 23-2346 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 14, 2025), addressing whether a...more
On May 2, 2023, in Volvo Penta of the America’s, LLC v. Brunswick Corp., Case No. 2022-1366 et al., Paper 15 (PTAB May 2, 2023), Director Vidal sua sponte vacated a PTAB decision denying IPR institution due to a district...more
On March 13, 2023, in Apple, Inc., et al. v. Vidal, Case No. 2022-1249 (Fed. Cir. March 13, 2023), the Federal Circuit reversed and remanded a decision from the Northern District of California dismissing a lawsuit filed by...more
In 2021, an organization of patent owners and various patent-holding companies sued the USPTO in the Eastern District of Texas. The patent owners sought to force the USPTO Director to engage in notice-and-comment rulemaking...more
Gen. Plastic Indus. Co. v. Canon Kabushiki Kaisha, IPR2016-01357, Paper 19 (PTAB Sept. 6, 2017), designated precedential in 2017, sets forth seven factors to be considered before discretionarily denying subsequent IPR...more