News & Analysis as of

Patent Ownership Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Jones Day

Director Says Typo Was Read Incorrectly

Jones Day on

On July 30, 2024, Director Vidal ordered patent board judges to revisit a ruling on “an obvious typographical error.” See Hesai Technology Co. Ltd., Hesai Group, and Hesai Inc. v. Ouster, Inc., IPR2023-01485. Director Vidal,...more

Jones Day

Federal Circuit Clarifies Scope of Patent Owner Estoppel

Jones Day on

The Federal Circuit recently issued a decision in SoftView LLC v. Apple Inc. clarifying the scope of patent owner estoppel set forth in 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(d)(3)(i). 2024 WL 3543902 (Fed. Cir. July 26, 2024). The regulation...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

IPR “Booted” Where Images on Webpage Coupled with Evidence of Sales Deemed Insufficient to Establish Prior Art Status

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board has denied institution of an inter partes review for a design patent in part because the petitioner failed to show that three asserted references qualified as prior art. Specifically, the...more

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

Cellect and Allergan: Obviousness-Type Double Patenting (ODP) in Reexamination and Reissue

Takeaways: 1. ODP in reexamination and reissue remains unpredictable despite Allergan 2. Patent Owners should carefully review ODP rejections to ensure they are proper Obviousness-type double patenting (ODP) is a legal...more

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

Reexamination Petition Practice Is a Critical Tool for Patent Owner Success

Takeaways: 1. Nontraditional and unique issue petitions are common for patent owners to properly prosecute reexamination proceedings. 2. Well-drafted petitions influence outcomes and preserve PTAB, District Court, and/or...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

PTAB Permits Submission of Evidence Midstream to Bolster Public Accessibility of References Despite Objections

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board has granted a petitioner’s motion to submit supplemental information, over patent owner’s objections, concerning the public availability of references that were relied upon to support grounds...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

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Delay in Correcting Disclosure of Real Parties-in-Interest not Procedurally Fatal to IPR Petition

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board instituted an inter partes review over patent owner’s objections that the petition did not timely identify all real parties-in-interest (RPI) and was filed by a phantom legal entity after...more

McDermott Will & Emery

From Oops to Encore: The Board’s Premature Adverse Judgment

McDermott Will & Emery on

The Director of the US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO) overturned the Patent Trial & Appeal Board’s premature adverse judgment against a patent owner and remanded an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding based on the fact that...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

IPR Grounds Doomed for Failure to Show Patent Reference Was Supported by Disclosures in Priority Application

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board has denied institution of an inter partes review, in part because the petitioner failed to show that a key reference qualified as prior art. The PTAB ruled that the petitioner was required to...more

Jones Day

Road Mapping Leads to Dead End

Jones Day on

On April 25, 2024, the PTAB denied Masimo Corporation’s (“Petitioner’s”) second petition for inter partes review (“IPR”) against U.S. Patent No. 10,076,257 (the “’257 patent”). Masimo Corp. v. Apple Inc., IPR2024-00071,...more

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

The Reissue Recapture Doctrine

One of the advantages of filing a reissue application within two years of the original patent’s grant is the ability to seek broader claims. More often than not, however, a broadening Reissue will be rejected by the CRU...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Cellect Your Weapon: Navigating Potential Arguments in the Aftermath of In re Cellect

McDermott Will & Emery on

In In re Cellect, 81 F.4th 1216 (Fed. Cir. 2023), the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that a later-expiring patent can be invalid for obviousness-type double patenting (ODP) in view of an earlier-expiring,...more

Jones Day

Shifting Burden Dooms Patent Owner

Jones Day on

In a Final Written Decision, the PTAB declared claims of a patent unpatentable after finding the patent was not entitled to the earlier priority date of the anticipatory reference in Platinum Optics Technology, Inc. v. Viavi...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Patent Infringement Suit Against Indemnitee Forecloses IPR Petition by Indemnitor

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board denied institution of a petition for inter partes review under 35 U.S.C. § 315(b) because the petition was filed more than one year after patent owner had served a complaint for patent...more

Jones Day

Institution Denied For Lack of Sufficient Structure

Jones Day on

The Board declined to institute inter partes review because Petitioner failed to identify adequate corresponding structure in the challenged patent that performed the function of claim limitation that was to be construed...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

McDermott Will & Emery

How Close Are They? PTO Looking for “Significant Relationship” Between Sequential IPR Petitioners

Addressing the issue of whether to discretionally deny a petition for inter partes review (IPR) under the General Plastics factors when there is no “significant relationship” between the petitioners, the Director of the US...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

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

USPTO Director Vacates and Remands PTAB’s Institution Decision Over Insufficient Explanation of Findings

The USPTO Director vacated a Patent Trial and Appeal Board decision denying institution of inter partes review for not addressing alleged differences between references in the petition and those considered during prosecution....more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Defendants Ordered to Coordinate Pretrial Litigation in MDL Are Not Necessarily 'Significantly Related' to Support Discretionary...

The Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office vacated and remanded a decision from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board discretionarily denying institution of an inter partes review petition. The Director concluded that...more

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

IP Hot Topic: USPTO Publishes Long-awaited Notice of Proposed Rulemaking with Updates to PTAB Practice and Procedure

On April 19, 2024, the USPTO published a long-awaited Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) that followed its April 2023 Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM). The proposed rules package, Patent Trial and Appeal Board...more

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

What’s in a Name? Why Reexamination Is Not a Re-Examination

Long before the America Invents Act (AIA) created the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) patent revocation proceedings, the patentability of one or more claims of any patent could be reviewed via Ex Parte Reexamination...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Handshake Agreement to Assign Does Not Provide Basis for Common Ownership to Exclude Prior Art

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board recently found claims directed to a web-based point of sale system and method unpatentable as obvious after conducting a thorough examination of whether a reference with one common inventor...more

344 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 14

"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