News & Analysis as of

Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding Administrative Procedure Act

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

Recent Updates at the U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Recent changes at the U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) have brought uncertainty to inter partes review and post-grant review practitioners before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO). These procedural and...more

Mayer Brown

Examining New Guidance from the USPTO on Discretionary Denials in AIA Post-Grant Proceedings

Mayer Brown on

Recent changes at the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) concerning the Patent Trial and Appeal Board's (PTAB) discretion to deny institution of inter partes reviews (IPRs) or post-grant reviews (PGRs) based on parallel...more

Jones Day

PTAB Pendulum Swings in Favor of Discretionary Denial

Jones Day on

Recent developments at the USPTO suggest a significant shift in favor of the PTAB exercising discretionary denial and uncertainty on behalf of parties to PTAB proceedings.  ...more

Bracewell LLP

USPTO Memorandum Bifurcating PTAB Institution Process Signals Shift Toward Increased Discretionary Denials in IPR and PGR

Bracewell LLP on

New Interim Process for Patent Trial and Appeal Board Workload Management - The USPTO has fundamentally altered the PTAB institution decision framework through a March 26, 2025, memorandum from Acting Director Coke Morgan...more

Jones Day

PTAB Announces Bifurcated Process for Consideration of Discretionary Denial Issues

Jones Day on

A new interim process for the Director to exercise discretion as to whether to institute an inter partes review(IPR) or a post grant review (PGR) was announced on March 26, 2025, in which discretionary considerations and...more

Foley Hoag LLP

PTAB Changes Procedure for Determining Discretionary Denials

Foley Hoag LLP on

Key Takeaways: - The Director, in consultation with at least three APJs, will now decide the discretionary denial question, rather than having the merits panel decide the issue. - Discretionary denial will have separate...more

Kilpatrick

Pre-Institution Overhaul: Unpacking the PTAB’s New Briefing Procedures

Kilpatrick on

Hot on the heels of rescinding former Director Vidal’s June 2022 memo providing guidance on discretionary denials, Acting Director of the USPTO, Coke Morgan Stewart, issued a memo yesterday outlining new “Interim Processes...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP

Pivot At The PTAB: The Acting Director Bifurcates Review

With two memoranda this week, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) has made significant changes to trials at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”). Those trials—introduced in 2012 by the Leahy-Smith...more

Knobbe Martens

IPR Standing Arguments Not Presented to the Board Are Forfeited

Knobbe Martens on

APPLE INC. v. GESTURE TECHNOLOGY PARTNERS, LLC - Before Moore, Prost, and Stoll. Appeal from the Patent Trial And Appeal Board. A patent owner forfeits its argument that an IPR petitioner lacks standing under 35 U.S.C....more

McDermott Will & Emery

PTO Reverts to Prior Post-Grant Guidelines for Cases Involving Parallel District Court Litigation

McDermott Will & Emery on

On February 28, 2025, the acting director of the US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO) announced that the agency will revert to previous guidelines for discretionary denials of petitions for post-grant proceedings where there is...more

Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C.

USPTO Withdraws June 2022 Guidance on Fintiv Denials

On Friday, February 28, 2025, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) announced the withdrawal of the June 2022 memorandum titled “Interim Procedure for Discretionary Denials in AIA Post-Grant Proceedings with...more

Venable LLP

USPTO Rescinds 2022 Fintiv Memorandum

Venable LLP on

On February 28, 2025, the USPTO issued a Notice rescinding a Memorandum issued by former Director Kathy Vidal, which, since June 21, 2022, had defined USPTO guidance regarding whether to discretionarily deny a post-grant...more

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

2024 PTAB Year in Review: Analysis & Trends

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) continues to play a pivotal role in shaping the intellectual property landscape. In 2024, several developments affecting PTAB practice emerged, from new rulemaking at the USPTO to key...more

Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C.

Director Review Codified as Director Vidal Steps Down—What is this Power and How Did Vidal Wield It?

With U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Director Kathi Vidal’s return to private practice in December 2024 and the future permanent Director yet to be tapped for nomination, it is a good time to reflect on one of the...more

Jones Day

Prior Art Asserted in Second Petition Should Have Been Asserted in the First

Jones Day on

The PTAB denied institution of a second inter partes review (“IPR”) petition filed by Aylo Freesites (“Petitioner”) after having previously instituted inter partes review of Petitioner’s first petition related to the same...more

Erise IP

Eye on IPRs: January 2025: USPTO Fee Increases; Patent Challengers Can't Dismiss Fed. Cir. Appeal After Decision

Erise IP on

Effective January 19, 2025, the USPTO is increasing various patent filing fees, including an across-the-board fee increase as well as specific increases for America Invents Act trials, Director Review, and other procedures....more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Novartis Pharma AG v. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2024)

Ever since the Supreme Court's decision in Dickinson v. Zurko, federal courts (including the Federal Circuit) are compelled under the Administrative Procedures Act to review factual determinations by the U.S. Patent and...more

Fenwick & West LLP

En banc Hearing Petition Filed on Recent Fed. Circ. Collateral Estoppel Decision

Fenwick & West LLP on

The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has sparked debate following a recent ruling on the Patent Trial and Appeal Board's (PTAB) application of estoppel provisions in invalidating amended claims in inter partes...more

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

Reexamination Petition Practice Is a Critical Tool for Patent Owner Success

Takeaways: 1. Nontraditional and unique issue petitions are common for patent owners to properly prosecute reexamination proceedings. 2. Well-drafted petitions influence outcomes and preserve PTAB, District Court, and/or...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

United Therapeutics Corp. v. Liquidia Technologies Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2024)

Zealous advocacy is a hallmark of adversarial proceedings, whether in district court or before the USPTO, where the opportunities for such advocacy have multiplied with the establishment by the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act...more

BakerHostetler

The End of the Fight Against Fintiv

BakerHostetler on

Inter partes reviews (IPRs) and post-grant reviews (PGRs) are proceedings in front of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) that allow a petitioner to challenge a patent’s validity and a patent owner to defend that...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Optimizing Obviousness: Routine Optimization Can Fill in Prior Art Gaps

McDermott Will & Emery on

In an appeal from a Patent Trial & Appeal Board finding of invalidity, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that the result-effective variable doctrine can apply even when there is no overlap between a claimed...more

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

2023 PTAB Year in Review: Analysis & Trends: Federal Circuit Cases Exploring a Year of Rules, Rulemaking, and Rule Enforcement at...

A trio of cases this past year illustrate a trend of increasing importance in the power of Patent-Office rulemaking and enforcement, and the influence it has on patent owners and challengers alike....more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Federal Circuit Rules on Inventor-as-Lexicographer Definitions and the Proper Scope of Reply and Sur-Reply Briefing Following...

ParkerVision, Inc., v. Katherin K. Vidal, Under Secretary of Commerce for IP and USPTO Director No. 2022-1548, (Fed. Cir. December 15, 2023) primarily involved three topics: (1) the type of language in a patent specification...more

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

Federal Circuit IP Appeals: Summaries of Key 2023 Decisions (8th Edition): Elekta Limited v. Zap Surgical Systems, Inc. 81 F.4th...

Zap filed an IPR petition alleging obviousness of a patent owned by Elekta. The petition relied on a combination of two references. The Board found a reason to combine the references and ultimately found obviousness of the...more

152 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 7

"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