Finnegan – AIA Blog

Contact
Share
Info
901 New York Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20001-4413, United States
Phone: 202 408 4000
Fax: 202 408 4400
Areas of Practice
  • Intellectual Property
Locations
Other U.S. Locations
  • California
  • D.C.
  • Georgia
  • Massachusetts
  • Virginia
Other Countries
  • China
  • Japan
  • South Korea
  • Taiwan
  • United Kingdom
Number of Attorneys
100+ Attorneys

Federal Circuit PTAB Appeal Statistics – December 2017

Through December 15, 2017, the Federal Circuit decided 289 PTAB appeals from IPRs and CBMs. The Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB on every issue in 216 (74.74%) cases, and reversed or vacated the PTAB on every issue in 32…more
 /  Administrative Law, Intellectual Property, Science, Computers, & Technology

PTAB Increasing AIA Trial Fees in January

On January 16, 2018, the USPTO will increase its fees for inter partes reviews (IPR), post-grant reviews (PGR), and covered business method reviews (CBM). The base cost for an IPR increases from $23,000 to $30,500…more
 /  Administrative Law, Intellectual Property, Science, Computers, & Technology

IPR and CBM Statistics for Final Written Decisions Issued in November 2017

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board issued 35 IPR and CBM Final Written Decisions in November, including decisions following remands from the Federal Circuit, cancelling 328 (62.84%) instituted claims while declining to cancel 194…more
 /  Administrative Law, Intellectual Property, Science, Computers, & Technology

Stay Up to Date on the Supreme Court’s Oil States and SAS Institute Cases

The Supreme Court’s upcoming decisions in Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC (No. 16-712) and SAS Institute Inc. v. Matal (No. 16-969) have the potential to dramatically change Patent Trial and Appeal…more
 /  Constitutional Law, Intellectual Property, Science, Computers, & Technology

Federal Circuit PTAB Appeal Statistics – November 2017

Through November 15, 2017, the Federal Circuit decided 275 PTAB appeals from IPRs and CBMs. The Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB on every issue in 205 (74.55%) cases, and reversed or vacated the PTAB on every issue in 31…more
 /  Administrative Law, Intellectual Property, Science, Computers, & Technology

IPR and CBM Statistics for Final Written Decisions Issued in October 2017

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board issued 44 IPR and CBM Final Written Decisions in October, cancelling 623 (70%) instituted claims while declining to cancel 267 (30%) instituted claims. Patent owners did not concede any…more
 /  Administrative Law, Intellectual Property, Science, Computers, & Technology

PTAB Designates Three New Informative Decisions

Last week the PTAB designated three new informative decisions on 35 U.S.C. § 325(d), regarding arguments challenging a patent that the USPTO has previously considered. The USPTO provided the following descriptions of the…more
 /  Administrative Law, Intellectual Property, Science, Computers, & Technology

Federal Circuit PTAB Appeal Statistics – October 2017

Through October 15, 2017, the Federal Circuit decided 258 PTAB appeals from IPRs and CBMs. The Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB on every issue in 191 (74.03%) cases, and reversed or vacated the PTAB on every issue in 30…more
 /  Administrative Law, Intellectual Property, Science, Computers, & Technology

PTAB Designates as Precedential General Plastic Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Canon Kabushiki Kaisha Decision on Serial Petitions

Today the PTAB designated part of its decision in General Plastic Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Canon Kabushiki Kaisha, IPR2016-01357, Paper 19 (P.T.A.B. Sept. 6, 2017) as precedential. In Section II.B.4.i of the decision—the only…more
 /  Administrative Law, Intellectual Property, Science, Computers, & Technology

IPR and CBM Statistics for Final Written Decisions Issued in September 2017

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board issued 33 IPR and CBM Final Written Decisions in September, cancelling 501 (87.28%) instituted claims while declining to cancel 53 (9.23%) instituted claims. Patent owners conceded 20 (3.48%)…more
 /  Intellectual Property, Science, Computers, & Technology

Federal Circuit PTAB Appeal Statistics – September 2017

Through September 1, 2017, the Federal Circuit decided 243 PTAB appeals from IPRs and CBMs. The Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB on every issue in 180 (74.07%) cases, and reversed or vacated the PTAB on every issue in 27…more
 /  Intellectual Property, Science, Computers, & Technology

Federal Circuit PTAB Appeal Statistics – August 2017

Through August 1, 2017, the Federal Circuit decided 236 PTAB appeals from IPRs and CBMs. The Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB on every issue in 175 (74.15%) cases, and reversed or vacated the PTAB on every issue in 25 (10.59%)…more
 /  Intellectual Property, Science, Computers, & Technology

PTO Designates Precedential its Athena Automation Decision on Assignor Estoppel in IPR

The PTAB designated as precedential its Institution Decision in Athena Automation Ltd. v. Husky Injection Moldings Systems Ltd., IPR2013-00290, Paper No. 18 (Oct. 25, 2013). According to the Patent Office’s message announcing…more
 /  Administrative Law, Intellectual Property, Science, Computers, & Technology

IPR and CBM Statistics for Final Written Decisions Issued in June 2017

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board issued 50 Final Written Decisions in June. It was a relatively difficult month for patent owners, with the Board cancelling 555 (80.32%) of the instituted claims while declining to cancel 114…more
 /  Intellectual Property, Science, Computers, & Technology

Federal Circuit PTAB Appeal Statistics – July 2017

Through July 1, 2017, the Federal Circuit decided 224 PTAB appeals from IPRs and CBMs. The Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB on every issue in 168 (75%) cases, and reversed or vacated the PTAB on every issue in 22 (9.82%)…more
 /  Intellectual Property, Science, Computers, & Technology
Showing 1-15 of 25 Results
/
View per page
Page: of 2
This profile may constitute attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Any correspondence with this profile holder does not constitute a client/attorney relationship. Neither the content on this profile nor transmissions between you and the profile holder through this profile are intended to provide legal or other advice or to create an attorney-client relationship.

"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:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.