4 Key Takeaways | Updates in Standard Essential Patent Licensing and Litigation
Behaving Badly: OpenSky v. VLSI and Sanctions at the PTAB — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Scott McKeown Discusses PTAB Trends and Growth of Wolf Greenfield’s Washington, DC Office
USPTO Director Review — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
The Briefing: Failure to Disclose Relationship with Real Party in Interest Results in Serious Sanctions
Podcast: The Briefing - Failure to Disclose Relationship with Real Party in Interest Results in Serious Sanctions
Disputing Patent-Eligible Subject Matter in PGRs and IPRs - Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Reexamination in IPR and PGR Practice – Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Reissue in IPR and PGR Practice – Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
3 Key Takeaways | Third party Prior Art Submissions at USPTO
Discretionary Denials at the PTAB: What to Expect? - Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Motions to Amend: PTO Pilot Program Extended - Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Drilling Down: Real Parties in Interest and Time Bars - Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
JONES DAY TALKS®: Supreme Court Rules on Constitutionality of Administrative Patent Judges
IPR Institution and Early Intervention - Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Jones Day Talks®: Patent Litigation, PTAB, Iancu's Legacy, and Institution Discretion
[IP Hot Topics Podcast] Innovation Conversations: Andrei Iancu
Nota Bene Episode 99: Unpacking the Pendulum of American Patent Policy Then, Now, and Forward with Rob Masters
Fallout from the Fintiv Precedential Decision
Six Things You Should Know About Inter Partes Review
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
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
In 2023, global investments in energy transition projects surged to approximately $1.7 trillion. This unprecedented investment level underscores the transformative shift toward cleaner energy sources and technologies....more
In the mid-2000s, the U.S. Patent Office (USPTO) determined that reexaminations would be more consistent and legally correct if performed by a centralized set of experienced and specially trained Examiners. As a result, the...more
A review of 2023 reveals it was an active and impactful year in shaping the policy and practice before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). In fact, all three...more
This Year in Review synthesizes key events and decisions from 2023 into a digestible guide that we hope will serve as a helpful reference for those who practice before, or adjacent to, the PTAB. As in the past, many of our...more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) recently published a revised PTAB Oral Hearing Guide (August 2023) updating prior guidance on hearings. The revised Guide includes changes to: 1. Remote participation in PTAB...more
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
On November 16, 2022, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”) vacated a reexamination proceeding because the patent challenger relied on unpatentability grounds that reasonably could have been raised in an...more
In Alarm.com Incorporated v. Hirshfeld1 the Federal Circuit analyzed whether a party’s challenge to the United States Patent & Trademark Office (“USPTO”) Director’s decision to vacate requests for ex parte reexamination...more
Over the last 20-plus years, US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit cases concerning written description and enablement have become a hot-button issue in the chemical and life sciences practices. The year 2021 was no...more
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
[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
In Alarm.com Inc. v. Hirshfeld, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled that decisions by the US Patent and Trademark Office Director vacating ex parte reexamination based on estoppel may be subject to judicial...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
FORUM SELECTION CLAUSES MAY OR MAY NOT PRECLUDE PTAB REVIEW - In Kannuu Pty Ltd. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. & Samsung Electronics America, Inc., No. 21-1638 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 7, 2021), the Federal Circuit considered...more
On September 29, 2021, the Federal Circuit in In re: Vivint, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2021) held that 35 U.S.C. § 325(d) applies to both inter partes review (IPR) petitions and requests for ex parte reexamination. Accordingly, the...more
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
Ex parte reexamination may be requested by either a patent owner or a third party in order to challenge the novelty or nonobviousness of one or more claims in a patent. ...more
A new "IP Fast Action Protocol" has been approved by the Commercial Courts of Barcelona and the European Union Trademark Courts located in Alicante in order to facilitate the handling of IP-related disputes before and during...more
In Return Mail, Inc. v. U.S. Postal Serv., 17-1594, Justice SOTOMAYOR wrote for the majority to overturn a Federal Circuit decision that the U.S. Postal Service had standing to petition for covered business method review. The...more
The Supreme Court ruled in Return Mail that a federal agency is not a "person" who may challenge an issued patent in inter partes review, post-grant review, or CBM review under the AIA. In its 6–3 decision in Return Mail,...more
In a 6-3 opinion authored by Justice Sotomayor, the Supreme Court held that the Federal Government is not a “person” capable of petitioning the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) to institute patent review proceedings...more
On June 10, 2019 the United States Supreme Court held in Return Mail, Inc. v. United States Postal Service, 587 U.S. ____ (2019) that agencies of the federal government cannot challenge the validity of a patent via USPTO...more
Earlier this week, the United States Supreme Court reversed the Federal Circuit’s finding that the government is a “person” eligible to petition for post-issuance AIA review proceedings. This 6-3 decision, Return Mail, Inc....more