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
Patent litigation at the International Trade Commission (ITC) is characterized by its rapid pace, with proceedings for investigations under 19 U.S.C. § 1337 typically concluding within 15 to 18 months after the filing of the...more
In two recent decisions, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) denied institution of inter partes review (IPR) proceedings sought by Apple Inc. against Haptic, Inc. regarding U.S. Patent No. 9,996,738 B2. These...more
Amongst the many decisions an attorney makes throughout litigation, there is one choice that can shape the outcome of a case way before filing a motion, setting discovery and trial strategy, or even calling a witness: venue,...more
This post summarizes two federal patent cases from the Eastern District and Western District of Texas issued in October 2024. The decisions considered the defendants’ motions to stay the cases pending the resolution of inter...more
As we previously reported, REGENXBIO’s litigation against Sarepta, alleging infringement of U.S. Patent No. 11,680,274 (the “’274 patent”) by Sarepta’s gene therapy product, was stayed pending resolution of Sarepta’s IPR...more
Our Texas Patent Litigation Monthly Wrap-Up for July 2024 covers three decisions of interest from the Eastern District of Texas granting motions related to subject matter eligibility, stays pending inter partes review (IPR),...more
Defendants in patent cases should be wary of the possibility that a plaintiff will attempt to add new defendants after a stay for inter partes review is lifted. In a pending case involving patents directed to “space...more
The Western District of Texas recently denied a defendant’s motion to stay pending inter partes review based in part on the defendant’s status as a non-party in the IPR proceedings. In doing so, the district court focused on...more
Four subjects stood out in patent litigation in Texas in April 2023: (1) applicability of the customer-suit exception to the first-to-file rule; (2) the level of ties a reasonable royalty methodology must have to the facts of...more
F5 Networks, Inc. (“Petitioner”) filed a Petition requesting an IPR. WSOU Investments, LLC d/b/a/ Brazos Licensing and Development (“Patent Owner”) filed a Preliminary Response. ...more
On October 26, 2021, Chief Administrative Patent Judge (“APJ”) Boalick lifted a May 1, 2020 stay issued by the PTAB pending the Supreme Court’s consideration of Arthrex in which 103 cases were placed in “administrative...more
Over the course of the past year, trial attorneys in state and federal courts have seen cases effectively stayed by COVID-related delays. COVID hampered in-person discovery and caused courts to re-set jury trial dates. Such...more
District courts commonly stay patent litigation cases pending inter parties review (IPR) that assesses the validity of the patents-in-suit before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). Such stay may be lifted or extended...more
A district court has ruled that the scope of IPR estoppel under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2) did not apply to invalidity grounds that relied on physical products. The court also declined to apply judicial estoppel, notwithstanding...more
Image Processing Technologies LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co., LTD. et al., Appeal Nos. 2018-2156, 2019-1408, 2019-1485 (Fed. Cir. March 2, 2020). The Federal Circuit vacated and remanded the PTAB’s decisions against Image...more
On August 6, 2019, United States District Judge Joan M. Azrack denied Plaintiff Andrea Electronics Corporation (“Andrea”)’s motion to lift the stay in Andrea Electronics Corp. v. Apple Inc., No. 16-cv-5220 (E.D.N.Y.) and,...more
In a recent order, the ITC denied a motion to stay after ALJ Bullock found that the balance of the Semiconductor Chips factors weighed against granting the motion. See In re Certain Memory Modules And Components Thereof, Inv....more
The Delaware District Court issued an order on June 7, 2018 denying a party’s motion to lift a stay following the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) final written decision in a parallel inter partes review (IPR)...more
The PTAB ruled that the Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe could not assert sovereign immunity in IPRs of patents that Allergan had assigned to the Tribe relating to Restasis®. See The Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe is not entitled to...more
The Federal Circuit has determined to partially stay an ITC exclusion order as it pertains to products redesigned after the remedial orders issued. We have previously posted about Certain Network Devices, Related Software and...more
On June 12, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in Oil States Energy Servs., LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC, to decide whether inter partes review (IPR) violates the Constitution by extinguishing patent rights...more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) issued Final Written Decisions regarding Cisco’s U.S. Patent Nos. 6,377,577 (the “’577 Patent”) and 7,023,853 (the “’853 Patent”) on May 25, 2017 and U.S. Patent No. 7,224,668 (the...more
This paper is based on reports on precedential patent cases decided by the Federal Circuit distributed by Peter Heuser on a weekly basis. ...more
A magistrate judge in the Eastern District of Texas recommended in Biscotti, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., No. 2:13-CV-01015, DI 191 (E.D. Tex. May 11, 2017) that Microsoft should be estopped from asserting invalidity grounds that...more
The America Invents Act (AIA) has been in effect from more than a year and half. Now, many have begun to ask if the patent office trials the AIA created are living up to their promise of lowering patent litigation costs and...more