Navigating PTAB’s New Approach to IPR and PGR Discretionary Denial - Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
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
Kroy IP Holdings, LLC sued Groupon, Inc., alleging infringement of 13 claims of U.S. Patent No. 6,061,660 (“’660 patent’), which relates to incentive programs over computer networks. Those claims were invalidated via...more
ALIVECOR, INC. v. APPLE INC. Before Hughes, Linn, and Stark. Appeal from Patent Trial and Appeal Board - A party in a PTAB proceeding forfeits the ability to challenge an opposing party’s discovery obligation violation...more
On February 6, 2025, the PTAB denied IPR institution because the Petitioner failed to establish that its key prior art reference qualified as a printed publication under Section 102(b). The PTAB’s decision hinged on whether...more
When issued patent drawings are not explicitly made to scale, the Federal Circuit recently confirmed that arguments relying solely or predominately on the features of those drawings, such as line thickness, are “unavailing.” ...more
Kilpatrick partners John Alemanni and Justin Krieger recently presented a CLE addressing “Building a Winning Evidentiary Record at the PTAB (and Surviving Appeal).”...more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) denied institution in an inter partes review (“IPR”), finding that an online store’s assertion regarding when a product was “first available” is by itself insufficient evidence of...more
The PTAB recently excluded a portion of Duration Media LLC’s (Petitioner) reply declaration for containing improper new evidence in an inter partes review petition filed against Rich Media Club LLC (Patent Owner) challenging...more
On June 6, 2024, the PTAB issued a Final Written Decision concluding claims 1-6 of U.S. Patent No. 8,899,655 B1 (“the ’655 patent”) unpatentable. Yita LLC v. MacNeil IP LLC, IPR2023-00172, Paper 70 (PTAB Jun. 6, 2024)...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a Patent Trial & Appeal Board obviousness decision, finding that disclosure in the prior art of all recited claim elements across multiple references, without more,...more
In AO Kaspersky Lab v. Open Text Inc., the PTAB denied inter partes review after determining that a screenshot of a GitHub repository was insufficient to establish that a whitepaper posted to that repository qualified as a...more
In Elekta Limited v. Zap Surgical Systems, Inc., No. 21-1985 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 21, 2023), the case addresses the interplay between findings related to motivation to combine and reasonable expectation of success in determining...more
In Jodi A. Schwendimann, fka Jodi A. Dalvey, v. Neenah, Inc., Avery Products Corporation, No. 2022-1333, 2022-1334, 2022-1427, 2022-1432 (Fed. Cir. October 6, 2023) (“Opinion”), the case addresses whether there was...more
Director Jason A. Fitzsimmons and Counsel Richard A. Crudo will present the “Developments in IPR Estoppel” webinar on Tuesday, December 5, 2023, at 1:00 PM ET. The possibility of being estopped from asserting prior art in...more
MEDTRONIC, INC. v. TELEFLEX INNOVATIONS S.A.R.L. Before Moore, Lourie, and Dyk. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board - Summary: Federal Circuit confirms low bar for evidence corroborating prior inventorship...more
Parties before the PTAB should be careful to submit supplemental materials as soon as practicable. In Extractiontek Sales v. Gene Pools Tech., the PTAB denied a Patent Owner’s motion to submit a deposition transcript from a...more
The US Patent & Trademark Office Director affirmed and designated as precedential a Patent Trial & Appeal Board (Board) decision denying institution of an inter partes review (IPR) petition where the expert declaration...more
Google petitioned for IPR of two patents owned by IPA. Each of the asserted grounds relied on the Martin reference. Martin lists as authors the two inventors of the challenged patents and a third person, Dr. Moran. During...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
In Salesforce.com, Inc. v. WSOU Investments, LLC d/b/a Brazos Licensing and Development, the Board denied institution of inter partes review of a patent directed to providing content to a limited display terminal (e.g., a...more
In a recent opinion by the Federal Circuit, Auris Health, Inc. v Intuitive Surgical Operations, Inc., Case 2021-1732, the panel split on the weight of general industry skepticism in an obviousness analysis and split on...more
The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return on investment for all stakeholders looking at the entire...more
In two related inter partes review proceedings, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board granted a petitioner’s motion to exclude the declaration of an inventor because the patent owner failed to make him available for...more
In conjunction with the release of the firm's year-in-review report, our speakers will discuss the recent cases surrounding IPR estoppels, evidentiary issues, and recovery, which notably highlight the interplay between the...more
Parallel proceedings before the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) are a common feature of district court litigation, and it is common for the factual records to overlap between these tribunals. As a result, questions...more
USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decisions in 2021 show that antedating a prior-art reference remains a viable option to knock out a ground in an inter partes review (IPR) petition—patent owners were successful in...more