News & Analysis as of

Patent Ownership Obviousness Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Recent Updates at the U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Recent changes at the U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) have brought uncertainty to inter partes review and post-grant review practitioners before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO). These procedural and...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

PTAB Year in Review – Caveat Experimenter: Using Experimental Data in PTAB Proceedings Comes With Risks

Parties involved in Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) proceedings sometimes contemplate submitting experimental data to support their positions. Although such data can be useful, there also are risks. Several recent cases...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

2024 PTAB Year in Review: Analysis & Trends – 2024 PTAB Case Highlights

Abuse of Process and/or Sanctions – 37 C.F.R. § 42.12 - Spectrum Solutions LLC v. Longhorn Vaccines & Diagnostics, LLC, IPR2021-00847, IPR2021-00850, IPR2021-00854, IPR2021-00857 & IPR2021-00860 - Decision...more

A&O Shearman

Federal Circuit Holds That PTAB Has Jurisdiction To Review Expired Patents

A&O Shearman on

On, January 27, 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed-in-part and reversed-in-part a decision from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) on certain claims of Gesture Technology...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

2024 PTAB Year in Review: Analysis & Trends

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) continues to play a pivotal role in shaping the intellectual property landscape. In 2024, several developments affecting PTAB practice emerged, from new rulemaking at the USPTO to key...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

2024 Design Patents Year in Review: Analysis & Trends - Design Patents at the PTAB: 2024 in Review

Inter partes activity involving design patents at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) was relatively low in 2024. The PTAB rendered just two inter partes decisions involving design patents: Next Step Group, Inc. v....more

Jones Day

Director Vacates Decision Based on Improper Claim Construction

Jones Day on

The PTAB denied institution of inter partes review reasoning that Petitioner did not demonstrate a reasonable likelihood that Petitioner would prevail in establishing the unpatentability of any of the challenged claims. The...more

Jones Day

Director Provides Reminders For Obviousness Analysis

Jones Day on

On July 9, 2024, Director Vidal reversed and remanded a denial of institution of inter partes review (IPR) relating to three Spin Master patents. See Prime Time Toys LLC v. Spin Master, Inc., IPR Nos. 2023-01339, 2023-01348,...more

McDermott Will & Emery

PTAB MTA Pilot Program to the Rescue

On review of a final written decision from the Patent Trial & Appeal Board in an inter partes review (IPR), the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that all challenged claims were obvious but left open the...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review | May 2024

Knobbe Martens on

Infringement Judgement is Only Final when there’s Nothing Left to Do but Execute - In Packet Intelligence LLC v. Netscout Systems, Inc., Appeal No. 22-2064, the Federal Circuit held that an infringement judgment is only...more

Jones Day

Institution Denial Vacated to Reconsider Prior Art Drawing

Jones Day on

On April 5, 2024, Director Vidal vacated and remanded the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB’s) denial of institution of inter partes review (IPR) where the Petitioner relied on a drawing in a prior art patent document to...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - May 2024

SnapRays v. Lighting Defense Group, Appeal No. 2023-1184 (Fed. Cir. May 2, 2024) Our Case of the Week deals with an issue the Court has not addressed recently: the question of declaratory judgment jurisdiction....more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Federal Circuit Rules on Inventor-as-Lexicographer Definitions and the Proper Scope of Reply and Sur-Reply Briefing Following...

ParkerVision, Inc., v. Katherin K. Vidal, Under Secretary of Commerce for IP and USPTO Director No. 2022-1548, (Fed. Cir. December 15, 2023) primarily involved three topics: (1) the type of language in a patent specification...more

Jones Day

Conception and Reduction to Practice Dates Matter

Jones Day on

In a recent decision, the Patent Trial and Appeals Board found that the disputed claims regarding transferring digital content were not unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) after determining that the prior art cited by the...more

Jones Day

Expectation of Success Analysis Need Not Be Separate

Jones Day on

In Elekta Limited v. Zap Surgical Systems, Inc., the Federal Circuit recently affirmed a PTAB decision finding certain claims of a patent owned by Elekta Limited (“Elekta”) to be unpatentable, even though the PTAB decision...more

Jones Day

Limitations Absent from a Notice of Allowability May be Material

Jones Day on

On August 24, 2023, USPTO Director Kathi Vidal vacated a PTAB decision denying institution of inter partes review in Keysight Technologies, Inc. v. Centripetal Networks, Inc. and remanded the case for further proceedings. ...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - August 2023

Knobbe Martens on

IPR Petitioners Must Be Permitted to Respond to Claim Constructions First Proposed in Patent Owner Response - In Axonics, Inc. v. Medtronic, Inc., Appeal No. 22-1532, the Federal Circuit held that where a patent owner in...more

Knobbe Martens

Weighty Considerations: Objective Indicia of Non-obviousness

Knobbe Martens on

Volvo Penta of the Americas, LLC, v. Brunswick Corp. Before Moore, Lourie, and Cunningham.  Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: The Board must consider the combined weight of multiple objective...more

Knobbe Martens

IPR Petitioners Must Be Permitted to Respond to Claim Constructions First Proposed in Patent Owner Response

Knobbe Martens on

AXONICS, INC. v. MEDTRONIC, INC. Before Dyk, Lourie, and Taranto. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Where a patent owner in an IPR proposes a claim construction for the first time in a patent...more

Knobbe Martens

Analogous Art Must Be Compared to the Challenged Patent

Knobbe Martens on

In Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GmbH v. Mylan Pharm. Inc., Case No. 2021-1981, the Federal Circuit reversed an obviousness determination by the PTAB. At issue was Sanofi’s reissued U.S. Patent No. RE47,614 (the ’614 patent),...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Delayed Disclaimer: Patent Owner Arguments Made during IPR Not a Claim Limiting Disclaimer in That Proceeding

McDermott Will & Emery on

Repeating a conclusion from an earlier non-precedential opinion in VirnetX, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that the Patent Trial & Appeal Board (Board) need not accept a patent owner’s arguments as a...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - November 2022 #3

American National Manufacturing Inc. v. Sleep Number Corporation, Appeal Nos. 2021-1321, -1323, -1379, -1382 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 14, 2022) - In an appeal from inter partes review proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal...more

Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C.

In Qualcomm v. Intel, Federal Circuit Defends Procedural Rights Before the PTAB

Last month, in Qualcomm Inc. v. Intel Corp., the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“the CAFC”) vacated and remanded the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“the Board”) on six inter partes review (“IPR”) decisions that...more

McDermott Will & Emery

No Due Process Violation When New Panel Hears Substantive Arguments

McDermott Will & Emery on

Affirming a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Board) non-obviousness determination, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that the Board did not abuse its discretion in sanctioning a patent owner who engaged in...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

PTAB Strategies and Insights - September 2020: Does the Federal Circuit Treat APA Challenges Differently if Brought by Petitioner...

Last month’s newsletter discussed Alacritech, Inc. v. Intel Corp, where patent owner Alacritech appealed a final written decision (FWD) of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) for inter partes review (IPR)...more

53 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 3

"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