News & Analysis as of

Motion to Amend

Issue Nine: PTAB Trial Tracker

by Goodwin on

Motions to Amend: Burden to Prove Amended Claims are Unpatentable Rests with Petitioner - On October 4, 2017, the Federal Circuit issued its long-awaited en banc opinion in Aqua Products, Inc. v. Matal, regarding the...more

Amending Complaints 101 By Judge Gross – Physiotherapy Holdings

by Fox Rothschild LLP on

In a 10-page decision signed November 6, 2017 in an adversary proceeding arising within the Physiotherapy Holdings bankruptcy (PAH Litigation Trust, case 15-51238), Judge Gross of the Delaware Bankruptcy Court denied a motion...more

Chris Lazarini Discusses Pro Rata Distribution of Assets in Receiver Case

by Bass, Berry & Sims PLC on

Bass, Berry & Sims attorney Chris Lazarini discussed a case involving the repercussions of the multi-billion dollar Ponzi scheme of Thomas Petters related to the management of the Stewardship Credit Arbitrage Fund, LLC...more

Post-Aqua: The Federal Circuit Vacated Denial Of Patent Owner's Motion To Amend

by Brinks Gilson & Lione on

In Silver Peak Systems, Inc. v. Matal, No. 2015-2017 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 24, 2017), the Federal Circuit vacated the judgment of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and remanded the case for further proceedings consistent...more

PTAB Provides Glimpse Of What Is Good Cause To Extend Trial

by Jones Day on

The PTAB may, where good cause exists, extend a trial up to six months beyond the required twelve month length pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §316(a)(11). On October 5, 2017, the PTAB issued its first “good cause” extension of a trial...more

The Patent Trial And Appeal Board Extended One Year Pendency Of An Inter Parte Review For Considering The Impact Of Aqua Products,...

by Brinks Gilson & Lione on

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued a first decision extending one year pendency of an inter partes review for good cause. Minerva Surgical, Inc. v. Hologic, Inc., IPR2016-00868, Paper No. 57 (P.T.A.B. October 5,...more

PTAB Extends Deadline to Decide IPR Motion to Amend in view of Aqua Products

by Knobbe Martens on

The PTAB extended the deadline for issuing its IPR final written decision on a motion to amend by up to six months to provide additional time to consider the impact of the Federal Circuit’s recent en banc Aqua Products...more

The PTAB Authorizes Additional Motion To Amend Briefing in View of Aqua Products

by Knobbe Martens on

The Board authorized petitioner Kingston to file a Response to the patent owner’s Reply to petitioner’s Opposition to Motion to Amend, based on the Federal Circuit’s en banc holding that the burden to establish...more

It May Have Just Gotten a Little Easier to Amend Claims in an IPR

A Factionated Federal Circuit Holds that Petitioner has the Burden to Show Unpatenability - In Aqua Products, Inc., v. Matal, [2015-1177] (October 4, 2017), a plurality of the Federal Circuit en banc held that §316(e)...more

Burden of Proving Unpatentability of Amended Claims Placed on IPR Petitioners

by Jones Day on

In an en banc decision, the Federal Circuit in Aqua Products, Inc. v. Matal addressed the question of who bears the burden of proving that claims amended during inter partes review ("IPR") proceedings are or are not...more

Federal Circuit Shifts Burden of Proof for Amendments in Post-Grant Proceedings

by Hogan Lovells on

On October 4, 2017, the Federal Circuit, sitting en banc, issued a ruling in Aqua Products, Inc. v. Matal, placing the burden of persuasion on the petitioner to prove the invalidity of amended claims in post-grant...more

Petitioners Bear Burden Of Proving Claims Amended During IPR Unpatentable . . . For Now

by Jones Day on

In yesterday’s decision in Aqua Products, Inc. v. Matal, No. 15-1177 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 4, 2017) (en banc), the Federal Circuit issued five opinions, spanning 148 pages, addressing the question of who bears the burden of proving...more

CAFC Eases Amendment Process In IPR Proceedings

by Foley & Lardner LLP on

Today in Aqua Products, Inc. v. Matal, a fractured Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) sitting en banc decided to flip the burden of persuasion onto petitioners in IPR proceedings to show that an amendment is not...more

Aqua Products, Inc. v. Matal: En Banc Decision on Motions to Amend Claims in AIA Post-Grant Proceedings Issues

by Brinks Gilson & Lione on

Those who were hoping for a clear standard to emerge as a result of the Federal Circuit’s grant of en banc review on the issue of burdens of proof for motions to amend in post-grant proceedings under the American Invents Act...more

Federal Circuit Shifts the Burden to Amend Claims at PTAB…For Now: Aqua Products, Inc.  v. Matal

On October 4, 2017, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a divided en banc decision in Aqua Products, Inc. v. Matal, vacating the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) final written decision insofar as it...more

In IPRs, Petitioner Must Show Claim Amendments Unpatentable

by Morgan Lewis on

A recent Federal Circuit ruling shifts the burden to petitioners, which will likely lead to patent owners filing more motions to amend....more

Aqua Products: Amendments in IPR Proceedings Come Roaring to the Forefront

Have you noticed the momentum of Federal Circuit decisions trending against the PTAB and petitioners? If not, today’s long-anticipated decision in the Aqua Products case will change your thinking. Albeit in a self-described...more

Issue Eight: PTAB Trial Tracker

by Goodwin on

A Surprise Move Designed to Shield Patents from IPR - On September 8, 2017, Allergan announced that it had assigned its patents covering Restasis®, a dry eye treatment with a reported $1.4B in sales last year, to the Saint...more

Sanofi & Regeneron Seek to Assert Inequitable Conduct Defense in Dupilumab Patent Litigation

by Goodwin on

As we previously reported, Immunex sued Sanofi and Regeneron earlier this year in the Central District of California alleging that the sale of Sanofi and Regeneron’s FDA-approved Dupixent® (dupilumab) product would infringe...more

Federal Circuit Reverses PTAB for Refusing to Allow Supplementation of Record to Add Later Inconsistent Deposition Testimony from...

The Board exercises substantial power over the scope of the record in IPRs, but the Federal Circuit’s decision in Ultratec v. CaptionCall illustrates a limit on that power. The case involved a collection of consolidated IPR...more

“A Reasonable Adjudicator Would have Wanted to Review this Evidence.”

In Ultratec, Inc. v. Captioncall, LLC., [2016-1706, 2016-1707, 2016-1708, 2016-1709, 2016-1710, 2016-1712, 2016-1713, 2016-1715, 2016-2366] (August 28, 2017), the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded Board decisions...more

Tough Puffery: Court Closes Door on Ford False Advertising Suit

The Northern District of New York recently found that Ford Motor Company’s “Built Ford Tough” slogan was non-actionable puffery, and dismissed putative false advertising class action claims brought under New York law that...more

PTAB’s Consideration of Prior Art Needs a Tune Up

by McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit remanded a case to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) where the PTAB had failed to consider a specific prior art combination and unpatentability argument advanced by the...more

Superior Court Explains The Personal Participation Doctrine

by Morris James LLP on

The Washington House Condominium Association Of Unit Owners v. Daystar Sills Inc., C.A. N15C-01-108 WCC CCLD (August 8, 2017) - When is a corporate employee responsible for tortious conduct in that capacity? This decision...more

Fairness in Evaluation: Federal Circuit Remand to Board For Failure to Fully Consider Petitioner’s Arguments Against Motion to...

by Foley & Lardner LLP on

In Shinn Fu Company of America, Inc. et al. v. The Tire Hanger Corp., slip op. 2016-2250 (Fed. Cir. July 3, 1997) (non-precedential), the Federal Circuit reversed a Board’s decision granting a motion to amend claims...more

175 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 7
Cybersecurity

"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:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.