News & Analysis as of

Ex Partes Reexamination Prior Art Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Jones Day

PTAB Institutes IPR Despite Concurrent Ex Parte Reexamination

Jones Day on

In Thermaltake Technology Co., Ltd. et al v. Chien-Hao Chen et al, IPR2024-01230, Paper 12 (PTAB Feb. 19, 2025), the PTAB granted the institution of inter partes review (“IPR”) while an ex parte reexamination (“EPR”) on the...more

Fish & Richardson

EPRx 201: The Risks and Rewards of Ex Parte Reexamination

Fish & Richardson on

Ex parte reexamination (EPRx) comes with risks and rewards for both patent challengers and patent owners. Patent challengers enjoy a lower threshold for institution and avoid the estoppel risk of other post-grant proceedings...more

Fish & Richardson

EPRx 101: Getting to Know Ex Parte Reexamination

Fish & Richardson on

Ex parte reexamination (EPRx) is a powerful tool that allows any party — including the patent owner — to request that the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) reassess the validity of an issued patent based on...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2022 Decisions

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

McDermott Will & Emery

Check Your Expert Skills and Standing

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit dismissed a portion of an appeal from the Patent Trial & Appeal Board (Board) regarding obviousness because the patentee did not have standing to challenge the decision...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - August 2022 #5

Best Medical International, Inc. v. Elekta Inc., Appeal Nos. 2021-2099, -2100 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 26, 2022) - In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit addressed issues of jurisdiction where a challenged claim was...more

Jones Day

Reexam References Count In Section 325(d) Analysis

Jones Day on

The Board denied post grant review in Palo Alto Networks, Inc. v. Centripetal Networks, Inc. under 35 U.S.C. § 325(d) after applying the Advanced Bionics framework as informed by the factors outlined in Becton. IPR2021-01520...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

2021 PTAB Year in Review: Analysis & Trends: The Resurgence and Perils of Ex Parte Reexaminations

Ex parte reexaminations have re-emerged as an increasingly important component of patent litigation and licensing negotiations. With the passage of the America Invents Act (“AIA”) and the advent of inter partes reviews...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

[Webinar] PTAB Analysis, Trends, and Forecast: Fintiv and Discretionary Denials - March 21st, 1:00 pm - 2:00 pm EDT

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox invites you to the webinar, "PTAB Analysis, Trends, and Forecast: Fintiv and Discretionary Denials," on Monday, March 21, 2022, from 1:00 to 2:00 PM (EDT). In conjunction with the release...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

2021 PTAB Year in Review: Analysis & Trends: Discretionary Denial under § 325(d): Strategic Implications of the PTAB’s Advanced...

The USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has increasingly used its discretionary denial authority in recent years. Although the PTAB’s discretion under 35 U.S.C. § 314(a) and Fintiv grabbed many headlines in 2021, the...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

2021 PTAB Year in Review: Analysis & Trends: Editors' Introduction

Love it or hate it, ignore the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) at your peril. The introduction of the PTAB as part of the America Invents Act over ten years ago has forever changed patent litigation. In its first...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

2021 PTAB Year in Review: Analysis & Trends

[co-author: Jamie Dohopolski] Love it or hate it, ignore the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) at your peril. The introduction of the PTAB as part of the America Invents Act over ten years ago has forever changed...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2021 Decisions

[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

Jones Day

If IPR’s Not Your Bag, Consider Ex Parte Reexamination

Jones Day on

These days, we generally think about inter partes review as a first option to challenge patentability.  Rightly so.  But don’t forget about ex parte reexamination (“XPR”).  Even in the IPR era, patent challengers are still...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

In re Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University (Fed. Cir. 2021)

Exactly two weeks after affirming a decision by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) rejecting claims for failure to satisfy the subject matter eligibility standard under 35 U.S.C. § 101,...more

Morgan Lewis

2020 PTAB Digest: The Latest Trends and Developments in Post-Grant Proceedings

Morgan Lewis on

As of 2020, post grant proceedings have been in use for eight years. Designed as an alternative to district court litigation post grant proceedings have offered litigants a faster and more cost effective forum for resolving...more

Haug Partners LLP

How Different Claim Construction Standards Can Ultimately Determine the Validity of a Patent

Haug Partners LLP on

Recently, the Federal Circuit issued a decision in Immunex Corp. v. Sanofi-Aventis U.S. LLC addressing the different claim construction standards used by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) (broadest reasonable...more

International Lawyers Network

Can Patent Claims be Cancelled Based on Indefiniteness by the PTAB during an IPR?

For the Patent and Trail Appeal Board (“PTAB”), the PTAB allows a petition for inter parties review (“IPR”) to request cancellation of claims in a U.S. patent. For an inter parties review of a patent, the PTAB institutes...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

PTAB Strategies and Insights - April 2020: What Evidence Can Demonstrate That A Printed Publication Was Publicly Accessible?

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

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Federal Circuit Appeals From The PTAB: Summaries of Key 2019 Decisions: Regents of the Univ. of Minn. v. LSI Corp., 926 F.3d 1327...

LSI and Ericsson petitioned for inter partes review (IPR) of several patents owned by the University of Minnesota (UMN). UMN moved to dismiss each IPR based on state sovereign immunity. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

PTAB Finds Good Cause for Staying Ex Parte Reexamination in Light of Parallel IPR

A panel at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) recently considered whether to stay an ex parte reexamination proceeding where the patent was also the subject of a parallel inter partes review (IPR). On September 11...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Federal Circuit Chastises PTAB Over Moving Target On Ex Parte Appeal

Foley & Lardner LLP on

The Federal Circuit decision in In re Durance is a rare precedential decision in an ex parte appeal from a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decision rejecting a pending patent application. The Court took the USPTO to task...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB: Summaries of Key 2017 Decisions

In 2016, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit docketed more appeals from the US Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) than any other venue—a first in its over 30-year history. The post grant proceedings created by the...more

Jones Day

PTAB Denies Institution Because of Pending Reexamination Considering Same Prior Art

Jones Day on

In a recent decision, the PTAB exercised its discretion under 35 U.S.C. § 325(d) to deny institution of an IPR petition that presented the same prior art before the Patent Office in a pending reexamination. Fox Factory, Inc....more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

The Board Gives Section 325(d) Sharp Teeth—Part II – The Petitioner's Criticality to Selecting and Using The Right Prior Art

This is the second of a three-part series discussing developments around Section 325(d). Part one appeared in our October 2017 newsletter and part three will appear in our December 2017 newsletter....more

27 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

"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:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide