Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati is pleased to present our 2024 PTAB Year in Review.
We begin with a review of 2024 petition filings and outcomes at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) of the U.S. Patent and...more
The PTAB Review begins by exploring collateral estoppel from unpatentability determinations in inter partes review (IPR) proceedings. Next, it summarizes recent developments at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office relevant to...more
Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati is pleased to present our 2023 PTAB Year in Review.
We begin with a review of 2023 petition filings and outcomes at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) of the U.S. Patent and...more
In this edition, we begin with a discussion of recent trends in sanctions practice at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). Next, we summarize several recent Federal Circuit decisions addressing various aspects of PTAB...more
This issue begins with a summary of several Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) policy questions the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has raised in an advance notice of proposed rulemaking. Next, we examine two...more
This issue of The PTAB Review begins with a brief update about the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO) Guidelines for when institution of an America Invents Act (AIA) trial (e.g., inter partes review or post-grant review)...more
This issue of The PTAB Review begins with a brief summary of changes to America Invents Act (AIA) trials recently proposed in Congress. It then explores a recent Federal Circuit decision rejecting arguments that the Patent...more
This issue of The PTAB Review begins with a brief summary of the U.S. Supreme Court’s most recent pronouncement about America Invents Act (AIA) reviews. It then provides an update on the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s...more
7/2/2021
/ Administrative Patent Judges ,
Apple ,
Appointments Clause ,
Arthrex Inc v Smith & Nephew Inc ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Executive Branch ,
Executive Powers ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Qualcomm ,
SCOTUS ,
United States v Arthrex Inc ,
USPTO
Earlier today, the U.S. Supreme Court decided the administrative patent judges (APJs) of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) were not constitutionally appointed, and that the patent owner, Arthrex, Inc., is entitled to a...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 firm's post-grant practice is pleased to present its 2020 PTAB Year in Review. The publication begins with a review of 2020 petition filings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and takes a closer look at the...more
In this edition, we discuss an update on the Arthrex Appointments Clause decision. We examine the continuing demise of same-party joinder and deference to Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) precedential decisions, and the...more
The America Invents Act (AIA) authorizes the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) to cancel patent claims that never should have been issued but prohibits the PTAB from acting on petitions for review brought more than one...more
4/23/2020
/ § 314(d) ,
§ 315(b) ,
§314(a) ,
§314(b) ,
America Invents Act ,
Appeals ,
Dissenting Opinions ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Judicial Review ,
Non-Appealable Decisions ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
SCOTUS ,
Thryv Inc v Click-To-Call Technologies LP ,
Time-Barred Claims ,
Vacated
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has decided whether tribal sovereign immunity required termination of inter partes review (IPR) proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). At the PTAB, Mylan...more
7/25/2018
/ Administrative Proceedings ,
Allergan Inc ,
Appeals ,
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
IP Assignment Agreements ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Pharmaceutical Patents ,
Sovereign Immunity ,
Tribal Governments
Orange Book-Listed Patents Prove to Be Popular Targets for AIA Challenges -
On March 13, 2018, Chief Administrative Patent Judge Ruschke of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) released findings of the Patent Office’s...more
Today, the U.S. Supreme Court issued two decisions that will keep the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) busier than ever. In Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene's Energy Group, LLC,1 the Court affirmed that inter...more
4/25/2018
/ Administrative Proceedings ,
America Invents Act ,
Article III ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Oil States Energy Services v Greene's Energy Group ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Post-Grant Review ,
SAS Institute Inc. v Iancu ,
SCOTUS ,
Seventh Amendment ,
USPTO
Challenges to Immunology Patents Lead Increase in Biotechnology Cases at the PTAB in 2017 -
Throughout the history of inter partes review (IPR) proceedings, petitions have been dominated by challenges to patents directed...more
Judicial review of post-grant patent proceedings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) is limited, but a federal court of appeals has somewhat loosened the restriction. On January 8, 2018, in Wi-Fi One, LLC v. Broadcom...more
1/11/2018
/ § 315(b) ,
America Invents Act ,
Appeals ,
Broadcom ,
Cuozzo Speed Technologies v Lee ,
En Banc Review ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Judicial Review ,
Non-Appealable Decisions ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Time-Barred Claims ,
USPTO
On October 4, 2017, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued an en banc decision in Aqua Products, Inc., v. Matal, finding that the petitioner has the burden of proving the unpatentability of claims—even...more
On January 9, 2017, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a decision in Phigenix, Inc. v. Immunogen, Inc. dismissing an appeal by a petitioner from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) for lack of...more
On June 20, 2016, the United States Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Cuozzo Speed Technologies v. Lee. The Supreme Court granted certiorari to consider two questions....more
Post-Grant Review Proceeding Filings Ramp Up In addition to inter partes review (IPR) and covered business method (CBM) review proceedings, the America Invents Act (AIA) provides for post-grant review (PGR) proceedings. PGR...more
6/10/2016
/ America Invents Act ,
Discovery ,
Estoppel ,
First-to-File ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Motion to Amend ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Post-Grant Review ,
Precedential Opinion ,
Real Party in Interest ,
Rules of Practice ,
USPTO
On March 15, 2016, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) places constraints on when petitioners may present evidence and arguments against the patentability of...more
On August 19, 2015, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) announced another set of proposed changes to the rules governing Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) trial proceedings under the America Invents Act (AIA)....more
8/26/2015
/ Amended Complaints ,
America Invents Act ,
Claim Construction ,
Covered Business Method Proceedings ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Post-Grant Review ,
Proposed Amendments ,
Rule 11 ,
USPTO
On July 9, 2015, a divided Federal Circuit held in Versata Development Group, Inc. v. SAP America, Inc., No. 14-1194, that it can review Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) determinations that a patent is a "covered business...more
On July 8, 2015, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, split 6-5, denied rehearing of its earlier decision, In re Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC, 778 F.3d 1271 (Fed. Cir. 2015), in which the court upheld the use...more