News & Analysis as of

Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding Today's Popular Updates Appeals

Knobbe Martens

No Error: The Board Committed No Procedural Error by Relying on Evidence Outside of the Prior Art Reference

Knobbe Martens on

SAGE PRODUCTS, LLC v. STEWART [OPINION] - Before Reyna, Cunningham, and Stark. Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The Board did not abuse its discretion by relying on...more

Knobbe Martens

It’s a Date – Twitter Reply Proves Prior Art Publication Date

Knobbe Martens on

VIDSTREAM LLC V. TWITTER, INC. Before Newman, O’Malley, and Taranto. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Evidence of a prior art reference’s publication date submitted after an IPR petition may be...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - June 2020

Knobbe Martens on

Non-Infringement Need Not Be “Actually Litigated” To Shield Accused Products From Infringement Liability In Subsequent Actions - In In Re Personal Web Technologies LLC, Appeal No. 19-1918, the Federal Circuit ruled that the...more

Jones Day

District Courts Find PTAB Statements Constitute Disclaimer

Jones Day on

In Linksmart Wireless Tech., LLC v. Caesars Entm’t Corp., Case No. 2:18-cv-00862-MMD-NJK (D. Nev. May 8, 2020) the Court addressed disputed claim terms in U.S. Reissued Patent No. RE46,459 (the “’459 Patent”), Linksmart had...more

Goodwin

Federal Circuit Finds Pfizer’s RUXIENCE Plans Insufficient to Establish Standing to Appeal IPR

Goodwin on

On April 27, 2020, the Federal Circuit issued a non-precedential opinion ruling that Pfizer failed to establish Article III standing in a pair of IPR appeals.  At the PTAB, Pfizer had challenged the validity of Chugai’s...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

PTAB allows Amending Claims on Grounds not raised by Petitioner, but were Addressed by the District Court in its Finding of...

To amend challenged claims during an Inter Partes Review (IPR), the patent owner must show that the proposed amendment responds to a ground of unpatentability at issue in the IPR trial. But in a recent final written decision...more

Goodwin

Biosimilar Appellate Roundup: Upcoming Oral Arguments and Decisions

Goodwin on

On December 6, 2019, the Federal Circuit will hear oral argument in a rituximab-related appeal by Biogen.  The appeal stems from a final written decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) in an inter partes review...more

Fenwick & West LLP

Intellectual Property Bulletin - Summer 2018

Fenwick & West LLP on

In This Issue - US Taxation of IP After Tax Reform - U.S. taxation of intellectual property has become astoundingly more complex after the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. The new rules are so complex that the IRS and Treasury...more

Jones Day

Court Grants Rehearing In Light Of Wi-Fi One

Jones Day on

Eleven days after the Federal Circuit’s en banc opinion in Wi-Fi Onc, LLC v. Broadcom Corp., Nos. 15-1944, -1945 & -1946 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 8, 2018), a three-judge panel granted a petition by patent owner Click-to-Call...more

Fenwick & West LLP

Intellectual Property Bulletin - Winter 2017

Fenwick & West LLP on

A Smooth Patch in a Rough Road? Governmental Transition and Intellectual Property - Whenever a new Congress convenes, some IP issues come to the fore while others take a back seat. Transition to a new administration in the...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

Failure to Let Patent Owner Address Unpatentability Arguments Relied on by the Board Violates Administrative Procedures

The Federal Circuit has ruled that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board cannot deny Patent Owner an opportunity to address portions of a prior art reference first discussed in Petitioner’s Reply, and then rely on those same...more

Knobbe Martens

Medtronic v. Robert Bosch – Has the Federal Circuit closed the door on reviewing IPR institution decisions?

Knobbe Martens on

On October 20, 2016, the Federal Circuit issued yet another opinion finding that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s decisions related to the institution of an inter partes review (IPR) are not subject to judicial review. ...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review | October 2016

Knobbe Martens on

Withdrawal of Claims During Prosecution Can Trigger Prosecution History Estoppel In UCB, Inc. v. Yeda Research and Development Co., Ltd., Appeal No. 2015-1957, the Federal Circuit held that prosecution estoppel can apply even...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Obviousness Inquiry Allows Flexibility in Considering Teachings of Prior Art

McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing issues of obviousness, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a finding of obviousness based on a flexible approach and further clarified the appropriate evaluation of secondary considerations...more

14 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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