Proof in Trial: University of Louisville
2021 Bid Protest Decisions with Far-Reaching Impacts for Government Contractors
#WorkforceWednesday: CA Whistleblower Retaliation Cases, NYC Pay Transparency Law, Biden’s Labor Agenda - Employment Law This Week®
Secondary Considerations of Non-Obviousness - Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
The Risk of Personal Injury Claims from COVID-19 and What to Do About It
Navigating the New Normal: Risk Management and Legal Considerations for Real Estate Companies
VIDEO: Will Pending Federal Covid-19 Legislation Preempt Longstanding State Laws Regarding the Burden of Proof in Workers’ Compensation Claims?
Podcast: IP Life Sciences Landscape: Aiding Orange and Purple Book Patent Owners in Developing PTAB Survival Skills
II-31- The Changing 9 to 5 From 1980 to Today
On February 10, 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a decision in Kroy IP Holdings, LLC v. Groupon, Inc., reversing and remanding a district court ruling that had dismissed Kroy’s patent...more
Because there are different burdens of proof in IPRs and district court, collateral estoppel does not preclude a patent owner from asserting claims that are immaterially different from claims canceled in an IPR....more
Since the America Invents Act (“AIA”) established a new venue for hearing patent disputes, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”), much ink has been spilled regarding the impacts of this forum on patent litigation and the...more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) denied institution in an inter partes review (“IPR”), finding that an online store’s assertion regarding when a product was “first available” is by itself insufficient evidence of...more
Being sued for patent infringement in the U.S. can be confusing, especially for foreign companies with limited litigation experience. Even more confusing are the multiple options and venues available for responding to patent...more
Precedential Decisions - Penumbra, Inc. v. RapidPulse, Inc., IPR2021-01466, Paper 34 (March 10, 2023) (designated: November 15, 2023) (regarding prior art status under AIA § 102) The Director designated as precedential...more
In Elekta Limited v. Zap Surgical Systems, Inc., No. 21-1985 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 21, 2023), the case addresses the interplay between findings related to motivation to combine and reasonable expectation of success in determining...more
I. Introduction - The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (“AIA”) was years in the making. From the first patent reform bill introduced by Representative Lamar Smith in June 20052 until the final House and Senate debates in...more
A recent Federal Circuit opinion clarified that patent owners carry the burden of proving that inter partes review (IPR) estoppel applies to invalidity grounds not included in their IPR petitions. The Federal Circuit also...more
On April 3, in Ironburg Inventions Ltd. v. Valve Corp., the Federal Circuit articulated a standard for applying inter partes review (IPR) estoppel on grounds a petitioner “reasonably could have raised” under 35 U.S.C. §...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded a Patent Trial & Appeal Board (Board) decision because it failed to resolve fundamental testimonial conflict relating to inventive contribution and complete...more
In Ethicon LLC v. Intuitive Surgical, Inc., the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) upheld a finding from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) the claims of Ethicon’s patent directed to a surgical stapler...more
Intel Corp. petitioned for six inter partes reviews (IPRs) challenging the validity of U.S. Patent No. 9,608,675, a patent directed to power management in wireless devices. In each proceeding, Intel and patent-owner Qualcomm...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
Please join Troutman Pepper's Intellectual Property and Health Sciences Practice Group for the sixth installment of the podcast series focused on strategy, trends, and other happenings at the PTAB. In this episode, Maia...more
In Qualcomm Inc. v. Intel Corp., the Federal Circuit ruled that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board violated patent owner Qualcomm’s rights under the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) by not giving it notice and a chance to...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
Recent changes in intellectual property law in the US International Trade Commission (ITC), the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and federal US District Courts have had major impacts on litigation strategy and business...more
It has been argued that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) cannot engage in rulemaking through decisions made by its administrative patent judges (APJs), even if those decisions are made precedential, as APJs...more
As we demonstrated in our own successful appeal, Arendi S.A.R.L. v. Apple Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2016), a petition for inter partes review (“IPR”) may fail when an expert declaration lacks detailed explanation. An expert’s...more
The availability of post-grant proceedings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has changed the face of patent litigation. This monthly digest is designed to keep you up-to-date by highlighting interesting PTAB,...more
It was a moderately eventful week at the Federal Circuit as the judges geared up for their August argument session and perhaps returned from their summer vacations. The Court issued 13 opinions and 2 orders on petitions for a...more
In 3Shape A/S v. Align Tech., Inc., IPR2020-00223, Paper 12 (May 26, 2020), the PTAB declined to deny institution of an inter partes review involving a patent challenged in a pending ITC investigation. Despite the advanced...more
The Federal Circuit continued its explication of the standing issue for unsuccessful petitioners in inter partes review (see "Argentum Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. (Fed. Cir. 2020)") in Pfizer Inc. v....more
On April 7, 2020, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) clarified what evidence can demonstrate that an asserted reference qualifies as a printed publication. This two-section article will first address four decisions...more