Latest Posts › USPTO

Share:

Failure To Maintain Correspondence Address Could Be Detrimental To Your Health

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 Designates Two 35 U.S.C. §315(b) Cases Informative

On January 10, 2018, the PTAB designated two decisions weighing on 35 U.S.C. § 315(b) as informative: Luv N’ Care, Ltd. v. McGinley, IPR2017-01216, Paper 13 (P.T.A.B. Sept. 18, 2017) (AIA § 315(b), insufficient funds at...more

Supreme Court Reviews Constitutionality of PTAB Proceedings

On Monday, the Supreme Court heard arguments regarding the constitutionality of PTAB post-grant trials in Oil States Energy Servs., LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC, No. 16-712 (U.S.). The question posed to the Court is...more

USPTO Adjusts Fees for PTAB IPR Proceedings

On November 14th, the USPTO issued a final rule setting and adjusting patent fees during fiscal year 2017. The new fees, set to take effect January 16, 2018, include upward adjustments of fees for requesting Inter Partes...more

PTAB Decision Provides Guidance On Using Art Previously Considered By The Office

On October 24th, the PTAB designated three decisions related to discretionary petition denials under 35 U.S.C. § 325(d) as informative. Unified Patents, Inc. v. Berman is discussed below. We previously reported on Hospira,...more

105 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 5

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide