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
In a precedential decision issued on August 13, 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that a first-filed, first-issued, later-expiring claim cannot be invalidated by a later-filed, later-issued,...more
This issue of The PTAB Review begins by providing an analysis of how institution decisions consider declaration testimony submitted by a patent owner. Next, it summarizes proposed rulemaking from the United States Patent and...more
This issue of The PTAB Review begins by summarizing a recent Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decision strictly applying the public availability standard for prior art references as a basis for denying institution. Next,...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
On November 7, 2023, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) sent notice letters1 to 10 brand drug manufacturers of drug-device combination products, including drugs delivered by asthma inhalers, epinephrine autoinjectors, 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 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 two brief updates about the power of the Patent Office Director to review Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decisions. Next, we examine a special circumstance under which a patent...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
On July 9, 2021, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) published a notice in the Federal Register on behalf of Senators Tillis, Hirono, Cotton, and Coons seeking public input for a patent eligibility...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
In this edition, we examine the effect of Fintiv on PTAB proceedings dealing with patents asserted in so-called “rocket docket” courts. Next, we provide a brief summary of several recent Federal Circuit cases. We conclude by...more
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
On May 18, 2020, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) heard argument in Interference No. 106,115, University of California1 v. Broad Institute2. The interference involves 10 patent applications of University of California...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 Federal Circuit, in Illumina, Inc., v. Ariosia, reversed the summary judgment decision of a lower trial court and upheld—as patent subject matter eligible—claims in two patents (U.S. 9,580,751; U.S. 9,738,931). The...more
On May 30, 2017, in Impression Products, Inc. v. Lexmark International, Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court held that a domestic or foreign sale of a patented product exhausts all U.S. patent rights in that product. The case was...more