5 Key Takeaways | Petitions for Expungement or Reexamination of the Trademark Modernization Act
JONES DAY TALKS®: Supreme Court Rules on Constitutionality of Administrative Patent Judges
JONES DAY TALKS®: Appointments of PTAB Judges Ruled Unconstitutional ... What Now?
NVIDIA petitioned for IPR of two patents owned by Polaris. The Board found the challenged claims unpatentable. Polaris appealed. While on appeal, the final written decisions in those IPRs were vacated and the proceedings were...more
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
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
[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
On November 1, 2021, the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office granted the first “Director review” to Samsung SDI Co. Director review is a new interim procedure that allows a party to seek review of a final written...more
On October 26, 2021, Chief Administrative Patent Judge (“APJ”) Boalick lifted a May 1, 2020 stay issued by the PTAB pending the Supreme Court’s consideration of Arthrex in which 103 cases were placed in “administrative...more
[co-author: Jay Bober, Summer Associate] 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...more
Maybe it was the end of summer and the start of fall, or the kids (kind of) going back to school. But whatever it was, last week the Court issued only one precedential decision, in a veteran’s benefits case. All said, the...more
Earlier yesterday, the Federal Circuit vacated the final written decision by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board in an inter partes review involving Appellant Snyders Heart Valve LLC and...more
IPR Petitioners May Not Raise Appointments Clause Challenges Under Arthrex - In CIENA CORPORATION v. OYSTER OPTICS, LLC, Appeal No. 19-2117, affirmatively petitioning for IPR waived the petitioner’s Appointments Clause...more
CIENA CORPORATION v. OYSTER OPTICS, LLC - Before Moore, O’Malley, and Stoll. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Affirmatively petitioning for IPR waives the petitioner’s Appointments Clause...more
On Friday, May 1, 2020, Chief Administrative Patent Judge Scott R. Boalick of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) paused all activity in the significant number of PTAB cases remanded to it from the Federal Circuit...more
On May 1, 2020, the Chief Administrative Patent Judge for the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) issued a General Order administratively holding in abeyance all cases remanded from the United States Court of Appeals for...more
This week the en banc Federal Circuit declined to revisit a panel ruling that found the appointment of Administrative Patent Judges (“APJs”) of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) violates the Appointments Clause of...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 Monday, March 23, 2020, the Federal Circuit denied rehearing and rehearing en banc in the Arthrex appeal that found PTAB ALJs to be unconstitutional appointments. Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., No. 18-2140, Order...more
Image Processing Technologies LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co., LTD. et al., Appeal Nos. 2018-2156, 2019-1408, 2019-1485 (Fed. Cir. March 2, 2020). The Federal Circuit vacated and remanded the PTAB’s decisions against Image...more
On January 31, 2020, the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) final written decision in view of Arthrex, but did so reluctantly because it disagreed with the merits and questioned the...more
Arthrex appealed a final written decision from an inter partes review (IPR) where the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) found all challenged claims of its patent anticipated. On appeal, Arthrex argued for the first time...more
In view of Arthrex, can an unsuccessful petitioner get a do-over of a PTAB decision denying institution of an IPR? The USPTO says no, and the Federal Circuit has been asked to consider the question in United Fire Protection...more
January 17 Update: On January 17, each of the parties filed responses to the rehearing petitions - As we have previously discussed on this blog and elsewhere, the Federal Circuit’s decision in Arthrex v. Smith & Nephew...more
The Federal Circuit and the patent world continues to grapple with the court’s decision in Arthrex v. Smith & Nephew. Since our last updates, the parties in Arthrex and other cases have continued the push for en banc...more
The Federal Circuit’s decision in Arthrex v. Smith & Nephew excited and disrupted the patent world... Inter partes review (IPR) reshaped patent law and patent litigation this decade after the America Invents Act took effect....more
For the Patent and Trial Appeal Board (“PTAB”), the Administrative Patent Judges (“APJs”) are appointed by the Secretary of Commerce in consultation with the Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office. For an...more
Last week, the Federal Circuit denied a motion to vacate and remand an IPR decision under Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc. Issued on October 31, Arthrex held that the method for appointing PTAB Administrative Patent...more