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
Adalimumab Challenged Claim Types in IPR and Litigation: Claims include those challenged in litigations and IPRs. Claims are counted in each litigation and IPR, so claims from the same patent challenged in multiple...more
PFIZER INC. v. SANOFI PASTEUR INC. - Before Lourie, Bryson, and Stark. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board....more
In an appeal from a Patent Trial & Appeal Board finding of invalidity, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that the result-effective variable doctrine can apply even when there is no overlap between a claimed...more
Last week, the Federal Circuit handed down its opinion in Pfizer Inc. v. Sanofi Pasteur Inc., affirming the Patent Trial and Appeal Board's (PTAB) determination that all claims of U.S. Patent No. 9,492,559 challenged in...more
As previously reported, in February 2019, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board issued final written decisions in two IPR proceedings initiated by Sanofi challenging the U.S. Patent No. 8,679,487 (the ’487 patent) owned by...more
Yesterday, December 12, 2018, the Board issued Final Written Decisions finding Claims 1-25 of U.S. Patent No. 7,476,652 (IPR2017-01526) and Claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 7,713,930 (IPR2017-01528) unpatentable as obvious over...more
Following up on our previous coverage of Immunex’s patent infringement suit against Sanofi related to Immunex’s Dupixent® (dupilumab) biologic, Judge Otero recently denied Sanofi’s motion for summary judgement of invalidity...more
In the ongoing Immunex v. Sanofi patent litigation regarding Immunex’s claims of infringement against Sanofi and Regeneron’s Dupixent® (dupilumab) product, Immunex has filed a reply brief in support of its motion to stay the...more
Last week, in the ongoing Immunex v. Sanofi patent litigation regarding Immunex’s claims of infringement against Sanofi and Regeneron’s Dupixent® (dupilumab) product, Immunex moved to stay the litigation pending resolution of...more
On April 5, Immunex (a wholly-owned subsidiary of Amgen) filed a complaint against Sanofi and Regeneron related to Sanofi and Regeneron’s Dupixent® (dupilumab) product, which received FDA approval last week. Immunex’s...more
It has been four years since the first inter partes review proceedings were filed in the United States. The first IPR petition, filed on September 16, 2012 (the first day IPRs became available), made it all the way to the...more