The CRISPR-Cas9 patent landscape remains complex and unsettled. The Federal Circuit’s latest decision in University of California v. Broad Institute1 revived the high-stakes dispute between UC2 and Broad3 over foundational...more
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
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
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 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
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
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 September 10, 2020, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decided key motions in Interference No. 106,115, University of California v. Broad Institute. The interference involves 10 patent applications of the University...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 Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) have made adjustments in their practices to accommodate the new realities of COVID-19 and social distancing, but...more
On March 23, 2020, a fractured Federal Circuit issued a precedential order denying rehearing en banc in Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., No. 2018-2140. On October 31, 2019, a three-judge Federal Circuit panel before...more
On October 31, 2019, a Federal Circuit panel issued Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., holding that administrative patent judges (APJs) of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) were unconstitutionally-appointed...more
Recently, the U.S Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a split panel decision in Athena.Athena, which examined the patent subject matter eligibility of four claims in one issued patent, upheld a district court's...more
AIA Institution Rates Following Supreme Court’s
SAS Decision -
On April 24, 2018, the Supreme Court issued its decision in SAS Institute v. Iancu, holding that when the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) institutes an...more