News & Analysis as of

Administrative Procedure Act Patents

Spotlight on Upcoming Oral Arguments – November 2017

In this appeal, the Federal Circuit will consider whether it has jurisdiction to review a PTAB decision to terminate an IPR and enter an adverse judgment against the patent owner. Arthrex argues that the Court has...more

The PTAB Authorizes Additional Motion To Amend Briefing in View of Aqua Products

by Knobbe Martens on

The Board authorized petitioner Kingston to file a Response to the patent owner’s Reply to petitioner’s Opposition to Motion to Amend, based on the Federal Circuit’s en banc holding that the burden to establish...more

It Pays to be Persistent if PTAB Rulings Violate Due Process Ultratec v. CaptionCall and Matal (Fed. Cir. 2017)

by Brinks Gilson & Lione on

In Ultratec, the Federal Circuit cited several problems with the Board’s permissive rules of trial proceedings and held the Board abused its discretion in its consideration of supplementary evidence. The Board’s regulations...more

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

In Honeywell v. Mexichem the Circuit vacates a Board determination of obviousness, ruling that the Board improperly relied on inherency, appeared to shift the burden of nonobviousness to the patentee, and violated the APA by...more

The Federal Circuit Clarifies Notice Requirements in AIA Trials

In EmeraChem Holdings LLC v. Volkswagen Group of Am. Inc., No. 2016-1984 (Fed. Cir. 2017), the Federal Circuit faulted the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) for violating the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”) in an...more

Rarely Granted Motion to Amend Defeated in the Federal Circuit

by Brinks Gilson & Lione on

In Shinn Fu Co. of Am. v. Tire Hanger Corp., No. 16-2250 (Fed. Cir. 2017), the Federal Circuit reviewed a successful motion to amend granted by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”). This appeal arose from an inter...more

PTAB Free to Adopt Claim Constructions Independent of Party Contentions

by McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) may arrive at its own claim broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) independent of those proffered by the parties and...more

Federal Circuit Puts the Brakes on PTAB Final Written Decision For Procedural APA Violation

In EmeraChem Holdings LLC v. Volkswagen Group of Am. Inc., the Federal Circuit reminded the PTAB that it must abide by the APA’s requirements of adequate notice and an opportunity to respond when conducting a post-grant...more

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

In EmeraChem v Volkswagen the Circuit reverses a determination of obviousness because the ?Board did not provide the patentee with an adequate opportunity to address a prior art reference ?that formed a principal basis for...more

General Statements in Petition and Institution Decision Did Not Give Patent Owner Fair Notice of the Grounds of Invalidity in the...

In Emerachem Holdings, LLC v. Volkswagen Group of America, Inc., [2016-1984] (June 15, 2017), the Federal Circuit affirmed the Board’s decision that claims 1–2, 4–14, and 17–19 of U.S. Patent No. 5,599,758 were obvious, and...more

How Far Is Too Far? Institution Decision to Final Written Decision

by Brinks Gilson & Lione on

In making a final written decision of AIA proceedings, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“the Board”) is not bound by findings made in an institution decision. In three recent decisions, the Federal Circuit considered the...more

Federal Circuit Affirms Obviousness of Novartis’s Patent for Multiple Sclerosis Drug

by Knobbe Martens on

The Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB’s final written decision holding that claims directed to Novartis’s multiple sclerosis drug Gilenya were obvious in Novartis AG v. Torrent Pharmaceuticals. Ltd., No. 2016-1352 (Fed. Cir....more

Just Because the Board Didn’t Say It, Doesn’t Mean that the Board Didn’t Think It

In Novartis AG v. Torrent Pharmaceuticals Limited, [2016-1352] (April 12, 2017), the Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB’s determination that the challenged claims of U.S. Patent No. 8,324,283, and Novartis’ proposed substitute...more

Highest Patent Court Narrows Scope of Covered Business Review

by Morgan Lewis on

A patent does not qualify for “covered business method” review if its claims are only incidental to a financial activity. The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) recently decided that a claimed method (in...more

USPTO Standards of Review for Inter Partes Review Proceedings

The Administrative Procedures Act (APA) applies to Patent Trial & Appeal Board (PTAB) proceedings, and the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) is using the APA to check the PTAB’s tendency to invalidate claims....more

New Ground of Invalidity Introduced After Institution Requires Proper Notice

by McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing the issue of introducing a new ground of invalidity after institution of an inter partes review (IPR) on which the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) relied to render a final written decision, the US...more

District Court Dismisses USPTO December 2015 Holidays Case

by Foley & Lardner LLP on

On December 2, 2016, Judge O’Grady of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia granted the USPTO’s motion to dismiss the complaint brought by Elm 3DS Innovations, LLC over the “holidays” declared December...more

PTAB Obviousness Decision Must Provide “Reasoned Explanation” For Motivation To Combine References

by Brooks Kushman P.C. on

In a recent pair of decisions, the Federal Circuit has tightened the procedural and substantive requirements for Board decisions on obviousness. In Nuvasive, the Federal Circuit vacated a PTAB final decision that challenged...more

Federal Circuit Reverses PTAB Patent Invalidation Based on Lack of APA Due Process

by Morgan Lewis on

Inter partes review (IPR) petitioners must ensure adequate notice of arguments against validity; patent owners must preserve rights to defend against all arguments raised by petitioners—even when they arise late in the...more

In re NuVasive Brings the Administrative Procedure Act to IPRs

NuVasive owns US 8,187,334, which claims certain spinal implants. Medtronic filed a petition challenging various claims of the ‘334 patent as obviousness over US 2002/0165550 (Frey) in view of US 5,860,973 (Michelson). ...more

Federal Circuit to PTAB: “Play Fair.”

In In re Nuvasive, Inc., [2015-1672, 2015-1673] (November 9, 2016), the Federal Circuit reversed one of two PTAB decisions because the patent owner was not given adequate notice of the grounds of invalidity asserted against...more

In re Aqua Products: The Convergence of Administrative and Patent Law

by Fish & Richardson on

Administrative law has permeated virtually every field of federal practice. Interestingly, patent practitioners have avoided this trend for some time. But this appears to be changing. See, e.g., Dickinson v. Zurko, 119 S. Ct....more

Federal Circuit Rules the Patent Trial and Appeal Board Can Consider New Evidence During AIA Review Trial

by Weintraub Tobin on

On September 26, 2016, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit declined to review in a unanimous en banc decision a panel Federal Circuit decision affirming that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (the “Board”) at...more

PTAB Decision to Institute Despite Alleged § 315 Time Bar is Not Reviewable

Wi-Fi One LLC argued that Broadcom Corp. was barred from petitioning for inter partes review under 35 U.S.C. § 315(b) because it was in privity with a time-barred district court litigant. To determine whether a petitioner...more

Federal Circuit Overturns PTAB Denial of Motion to Amend Claims in IPR Proceeding

by Brooks Kushman P.C. on

Veritas Technologies LLC v. Veeam Software Corp., No. 2015-1894 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 30, 2016). On recurring controversy in AIA trials is the difficulty patent owners face meeting the PTAB’s strict requirements for amending...more

54 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 3
Cybersecurity

"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.