News & Analysis as of

Abuse of Discretion Patent Litigation Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2022 Decisions: Hunting Titan, Inc. v. DynaEnergetics Europe GmbH,...

Here, Hunting Titan petitioned for IPR of DynaEnergetics’ ’422 patent, asserting that the patent was anticipated in light of the Schacherer reference. The Board instituted the IPR and found all original claims unpatentable as...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2022 Decisions

As part of the recovery from the global COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit took steps to return to normal operations. It began requiring live oral arguments in August 2022 and, by November,...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2021 Decisions

[co-author: Jamie Dohopolski] Last year, the continued global COVID-19 pandemic forced American courts to largely continue the procedures set in place in 2020. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was no...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

PTAB Strategies and Insights: January 2022

The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return on investment for all stakeholders looking at the entire...more

Jones Day

Fed. Cir. Rejects PTAB Decision on Mystery Shopper Patent; Returns to Sender

Jones Day on

The Federal Circuit in AMC Multi-Cinema, Inc. v. Fall Line Patents (Fed. Circ. September 30, 2021, op. 21-1051) held that the PTAB partially abused its discretion when upholding one claim of U.S. Patent No. 9,454,748 for...more

WilmerHale

CAFC Patent Cases - September 2021 #3

WilmerHale on

Precedential Federal Circuit Opinions IN RE: JUNIPER NETWORKS, INC. [OPINION]  (2021-160, September 2, 2021) (Lourie, Bryson, and Taranto) - Per curiam. Issuing writ of mandamus directing the United States District Court...more

Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C.

PTAB Corrects Error and Institutes a Previously Denied IPR

Earlier this month, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board granted a request for rehearing in Maxlite, Inc. v. Jiaxing Super Lighting Elec. Appl. Co., Ltd., No. IPR2020-00208, Paper 14 (P.T.A.B. June 1, 2021), thereby instituting...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Ferring B.V. v. Allergan, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2020)

The Federal Circuit has taken the occasion, in appeals from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board as well as district courts, to remand judgments whenever the Court believes that the record below is devoid of sufficient detail to...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - March 2020 #2

PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Communication Test Design, Inc. v. Contec, LLC, Appeal No. 2019-1672 (Fed. Cir. March 13, 2020) - This week’s Case of the Week explores two important procedural issues: a court’s discretion to...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Petitioner’s Reply Argument in IPR Is Not an Impermissible New Theory

McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing whether the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) too narrowly read its rules limiting reply briefs in an inter partes review (IPR) to preclude a petitioner’s argument as a “new theory of unpatentability,”...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Federal Circuit Appeals From The PTAB: Summaries of Key 2019 Decisions: Honeywell International Inc. v. Arkema Inc., 939 F.3d 1345...

Honeywell owns U.S. Patent 9,157,017, which claims automotive air-conditioning systems. The application to the ’017 patent had originally described and recited claims for flouroalkane compounds for use in refrigeration...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - October 2019

Knobbe Martens on

The PTAB Cannot Approve or Deny Certificates of Correction - In Honeywell International, Inc. v. Arkema Inc., Arkema France, Appeal Nos. 2018-1151, -1153, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) does not have the...more

Jones Day

PTAB Abused Discretion in Denying Request to File Motion for Additional Discovery

Jones Day on

In a recent appeal of two inter partes review (“IPR”) decisions from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”), The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) held that the Board abused its discretion in denying...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - May 2019 #4

PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Papst Licensing GMBH & Co. KG v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc., Appeal No. 2018-1777 (Fed. Cir. May 23, 2019) - In a sternly-worded decision this week, the Federal Circuit held claims to...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - October 2018

Gust, Inc. v. AlphaCap Ventures, LLC, Appeal No. 2017-2414 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 28, 2018) In an appeal from a district court decision awarding fees pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1927, the Federal Circuit reversed. The decision makes...more

Knobbe Martens

01 Communique Laboratory, Inc. v. Citrix Systems, Inc.

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Summaries - Before Newman, Mayer, and Stoll. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio. Summary: While there is not a “practicing the prior art” defense to literal...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Fresh From the Bench: Precedential Patent Cases From the Federal Circuit

In AdjustaCam v. Newegg, the Circuit reverses the denial of attorney fees where Judge Gilstrap simply adopted a pre-Octane Fitness determination by a prior judge, despite the Circuit’s post-Octane Fitness remand of the case...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Board to Petitioner: No RPI, No IPR - Corning Optical Comm’s RF, LLC v. PPC Broadband, Inc.

McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing the requirement to disclose the real parties-in-interest (RPI) for an inter partes review (IPR), the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) denied the petitioner’s request for rehearing regarding the...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Section 325(d) Does Not Preclude All Second Petitions - Motorola Mobility LLC v. Intellectual Ventures I LLC

Addressing its decision to institute a covered business method (CBM) patent review based on a second petition, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (PTO) Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) found that its decision...more

19 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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