The PTAB’s November statistics confirmed the expected jump in PTAB filings in November, with many petitioners seeking to file petitions before the changeover from the BRI to Phillips claim construction standard. 212 petitions...more
The 2019 PTAB Bar Association Annual Conference will take place March 14 – 15, 2019, at the Ritz-Carlton in Washington, D.C. Pre-conference sessions will be offered March 13. The conference will bring together practitioners,...more
The PTAB’s October statistics indicate a quiet first month of FY 2019, with 115 petitions for IPR, 5 PGR petitions, and 2 CBM petitions being filed in October. That filing rate would extrapolate to 1464 total filings for the...more
Among the many differences from a patent litigation in a district court, the expedited nature of an inter partes review (IPR) brings with it an obligation for the petitioner to have a full-fledged legal theory of its case...more
The USPTO has published a final rule changing the claim construction standard applied during inter partes review (IPR), post-grant review (PGR), and the transitional program for covered business method patents (CBM)...more
In a recent PTAB decision, Petitioners learned the importance of addressing decisions from related IPRs when making arguments before the PTAB. Apple, Inc. and FitBit, Inc. v. Valencell, Inc., Case IPR2017-00319 (PTAB Aug. 6,...more
Today, the USPTO issued a press release announcing a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for Claim Construction Standards used in PTAB Proceedings. The rule proposed by the Office would change the prior policy of using the Broadest...more
5/9/2018
/ Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) ,
Article III ,
Broadest Reasonable Interpretation Standard ,
Claim Construction ,
International Trade Commission (ITC) ,
Judicial Review ,
Patent Invalidity ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Proposed Rules ,
Standard of Review ,
USPTO
On March 13, 2018, in Nestlé USA, Inc. v. Steuben Foods, Inc., 2017-1193 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 13, 2018), the Federal Circuit confirmed that collateral estoppel may preclude the need to revisit an issue that had already been...more
The PTAB rules state that “[t]he petition and supporting evidence must be served on the patent owner at the correspondence address of record for the subject patent.” 37 C.F.R. § 42.105(a). Prompt service is important in IPRs...more
PTAB trials are nearly always (~ 4 out of 5) driven by some concurrent litigation need, either a district court complaint of infringement filed against the petitioner or an International Trade Commission (ITC) investigation...more
In a unanimous opinion issued on February 14, 2017, a three-judge panel of the Federal Circuit vacated the Board’s obviousness determination in Apple’s inter partes review against PersonalWeb and remanded for further...more