News & Analysis as of

Covered Business Method Proceedings

PTAB Issues New Remand Procedures

by Knobbe Martens on

On November 16, 2017, the USPTO issued new procedures (“Standard Operating Procedure 9”) for governing cases remanded from the Federal Circuit. These procedures are applicable to all decisions remanded from the Federal...more

Oil States Preview Take II -- Just What Did the Supreme Court Hold in McCormick Harveting Machine v. Aultman?

Last week, we provided a preview of the Supreme Court case Oil States Energy Services, LLC. v. Greene's Energy Group, LLC. that will be argued on November 27, 2017. The underlying case has received a lot of attention, so it...more

New USPTO Fee Schedule Increases Fees For Challenging Granted Patents, Adds Streamlined Reexamination Option

by Fox Rothschild LLP on

The USPTO recently published an adjusted fee schedule for certain patent fees. The new schedule significantly increases the fees for challenging the validity of a patent in inter partes review (IPR), post-grant review (PGR)...more

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

by Finnegan – AIA Blog on

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

What if IPRs are Found Unconstitutional in Oil States?

On November 27, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC. The issue is: - Whether inter partes review, an adversarial process used by the Patent and Trademark...more

USPTO Fee Increases Impact IPR Filing Costs

by Orrick - IP Landscape on

Much like death and taxes, USPTO fee increases are a sure thing. On November 14, 2017, the USPTO issued a new final rule raising many of the fees charged by the Office. The Office also provided a chart that shows the...more

3 Top Takeaways: Appeals of Post-Alice Eligibility Rejections Face Tough Prospects

Nearly all eligibility rejections challenged in post-Alice appeals in computer related technologies are affirmed in whole by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). Most of those appeals originate from business-method art...more

AIA Trial Fees to Increase Substantially

On November 14, 2017, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) published a final rule on fee increases that will take effect on January 16, 2018. 82 Fed. Reg. 52,780. The USPTO has substantially increased the...more

Real Parties-in-Interest Discovery In Post-Grant Proceedings

by WilmerHale on

The America Invents Act of 2011 requires petitioners in post-grant proceedings—including in all inter partes reviews (IPRs) and covered business method (CBM) reviews—to identify each ‘‘real party-in-interest’’ (i.e., ‘‘the...more

USPTO Finalizes Rule For Privileged Communications In Trials Before The PTAB

by Weintraub Tobin on

The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (“AIA”) provided for trials before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) in inter partes reviews, post-grant reviews, the...more

Federal Circuit PTAB Appeal Statistics – Octobe 2017

by Finnegan – AIA Blog on

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

Federal Circuit Shifts Burden of Demonstrating Patentability for Amended Claims in Post-Grant Proceedings

by Alston & Bird on

Since the enactment of the America Invents Act (AIA), the USPTO’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has required patent owners to bear the burden of proving the patentability of substitute claims in post-grant motions to...more

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

by Finnegan – AIA Blog on

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...more

Expanded Panel Ratifies Post-Petition Disclaimer As Legitimate CBM Eligibility Strategy

by Jones Day on

An expanded panel at the PTAB has found that post-Petition claim cancellation is a legitimate strategy for patent owners to avoid CBM jurisdiction. In deciding petitioner’s Institution Decision Rehearing Request in Facebook,...more

In re Stepan Co. (Fed. Cir. 2017)

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) gets most of its attention (judicial and otherwise) regarding its decisions in inter partes review and covered business method proceedings. But the Board also has responsibility for...more

PTAB Denies Institution of CBM Review for Lack of Standing in view of Covenant Not to Sue

by Knobbe Martens on

The PTAB denied institution of Covered Business Method (CBM) Review, finding that the parties’ license agreement and covenant not to sue removed any “imminent” threat of an infringement suit. MasterCard International Inc., v....more

Federal Circuit PTAB Appeal Statistics – September 2017

by Finnegan – AIA Blog on

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

Patent Trial and Appeal Board Activity in the First Five Years+

by Knobbe Martens on

September 16, 2017 marked five years since the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) was created. Some of the notable statistics and trends of the previous 5 years are shown here....more

Preemption is “Part and Parcel” of the §101; But Lack of Preemption Does Not Necessarily Establish Patentability

In Return Mail, Inc. v. United States Postal Service, [2016-1502] (August 28, 2017), the Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB’s decision that the US Postal Service had standing to challenge Return Mails patents in an CBMR, and...more

Federal Circuit PTAB Appeal Statistics – August 2017

by Finnegan – AIA Blog on

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...more

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

by Finnegan – AIA Blog on

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...more

Interplay Between “Technological Invention” and “Significantly More” in PTAB CBM Review

by Knobbe Martens on

On July 18, 2017, the United States Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) instituted a covered business method (“CBM”) patent review for U.S. Patent No. 8,955,029 (“the ’029 patent”) on grounds of...more

Cloud9 Technologies LLC v. IPC Systems, Inc. (PTAB 2017)

Petitioner Cloud9 requested covered business method (CBM) review of IPC's U.S. Patent No. 8,189,566 before the USPTO's Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Due to the claims of the '566 patent not reciting a financial element, the...more

Federal Circuit PTAB Appeal Statistics – July 2017

by Finnegan – AIA Blog on

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

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

by Finnegan – AIA Blog on

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board issued 41 Final Written Decisions in May. It was a relatively patentee-friendly month, with the Board cancelling 269 (48.04%) of the instituted claims while declining to cancel 287 (51.25%)...more

277 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 12
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.