Estoppel Doctrine in China's Patent System
Smith & Nephew petitioned for inter partes review (IPR) of Arthrex’s patent. After the petition was filed, but before the Board issued an institution decision, Arthrex statutorily disclaimed all the challenged claims under 37...more
In 2018, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit docketed close to 600 appeals from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). That is the second highest number since starting to hear post-American Invents Act...more
At this point, several cases have examined the appealability of the Board’s institution decisions in inter partes review (“IPR”) proceedings. See, e.g., Cuozzo Speed Techs., LLC v. Lee, 136 S. Ct. 2131, 2142 (2015) (holding...more
In a split decision that drew separate opinions from each of the panel members, the Federal Circuit recently affirmed the PTAB’s decision to enter an adverse judgment against a patentee, even though the patentee had properly...more
Inter Partes Reexamination Estoppel Attaches On Claim-by-Claim Basis for New Requests and Pending Proceedings - In In re Affinity Labs Of Texas, LLC, Appeal Nos. 2016-1092, 2016-1172, the Federal Circuit held that the...more
Many patent owners have not yet had to defend against an inter partes review (IPR), but the popularity of this proceeding increases the chances that they will encounter it down the road if they have not already faced one....more
When a patent is challenged in an inter partes review and a final written decision has been issued, a statutory estoppel will prevent certain subsequent proceedings. The scope of the estoppel, which applies to both Patent and...more