News & Analysis as of

Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding Ex Partes Reexamination United States Patent and Trademark Office

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.

Sterne Kessler’s Reissue, Reexamination, and Supplemental Examination Practice Tips – November/December 2024

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

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

Historical Development of Substantial New Question contrasted with the new Section 325(d) Criteria

Ex parte reexamination proceedings have been available for over 40 years. The reexamination statutes, Public Law 96-517 of July 1, 1981 (also known as the Bayh-Dole Act), included 35 U.S.C. § 303, which codified, in part,...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Federal Circuit Upholds USPTO Authority to Estop Patentees from Obtaining Patent Claims 'Not Patentably Distinct' from Previously...

The Federal Circuit recently upheld the USPTO’s authority under the estoppel provision 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(d)(3)(i) to prohibit a patent owner from obtaining patent claims that are not patentably distinct from claims previously...more

Baker Botts L.L.P.

Intellectual Property Report - October 2024

Baker Botts L.L.P. on

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

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

Demonstrating Unequivocal Intent to Broaden in Reissue

Takeaways: - Patentees must demonstrate “unequivocal intent” to broaden claims in a broadening reissue. - To establish a broadening reissue, a patentee’s actions must align with their words within the two year statutory...more

Knobbe Martens

Estoppel Does Not Apply to Previously Issued Claims

Knobbe Martens on

Before Bryson, Lourie, and Reyna. Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”), Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”). Summary: Estoppel under 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(d)(3)(i) only applies to obtaining new...more

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

Sterne Kessler’s Reissue, Reexamination, and Supplemental Examination Practice Tips – June 2024

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

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

Sterne Kessler’s Reissue, Reexamination, and Supplemental Examination Practice Tips – May 2024

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

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

2023 PTAB Year in Review: Analysis & Trends: Reexamination Statistics and the Federal Circuit’s SNQ Clarification/Expansion

The recent resurgence in ex parte reexamination demonstrates the importance of this post-grant review vehicle. It has become particularly important for patent challengers who may be estopped from requesting inter partes...more

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

2023 PTAB Year in Review: Editors’ Introduction

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

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

2023 PTAB Year in Review: Analysis & Trends

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

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

In Re: Cellect, LLC No. 2022-1293 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 28, 2023)

This case addresses how Patent Term Adjustment (PTA) interacts with obviousness-type double patenting (ODP). Background - Cellect sued Samsung Electronics, Co. for infringement of four patents. Subsequently, Samsung...more

Jones Day

Salesforce’s Reexams Estopped by RPX IPRs

Jones Day on

In decisions rare of their kind, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) terminated two ex parte reexaminations in view of inter partes review (“IPR”) proceedings initiated by a different party. The decisions represent...more

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

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2022 Decisions: Best Medical Int’l, Inc. v. Elekta Inc., 46 F.4th...

Varian filed two petitions for IPR of BMI’s ’096 patent, which the Board instituted. Elekta filed copycat petitions and successfully joined Varian’s two instituted IPRs. A previously filed, parallel ex parte reexamination 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

No Mulligans Here: PTO Rewinds Reexamination Based on Estoppel

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO) terminated a pending ex parte reexamination after finding that the challenger was estopped because the prior art references could have been raised in a prior inter partes review (IPR)....more

Jones Day

Ex Parte Reexamination Barred Based on Earlier IPR

Jones Day on

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

Haug Partners LLP

The Federal Circuit in Alarm.com Incorporated v. Hirshfeld: Parties CAN Seek Review of USPTO Director’s Decision to Vacate Ex...

Haug Partners LLP on

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

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

2021 PTAB Year in Review: Analysis & Trends: Case Studies and Trends at the PTAB Involving 35 U.S.C. § 112

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 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

McDermott Will & Emery

What Preclusion? Post-IPR Reexam Moves Forward

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit revived a petitioner’s validity challenge seeking ex parte review at the US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO), reversing a district court decision dismissing its complaint seeking...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

52 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 3

"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