Supplemental Examination: A Tool Worth Further Consideration - Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Six Things You Should Know About Inter Partes Review
JONES DAY TALKS®: PTAB Litigation Blog Reaches 500 Posts ... and the PTAB Reacts to COVID-19
Podcast: IP Life Sciences Landscape: Aiding Orange and Purple Book Patent Owners in Developing PTAB Survival Skills
The Supreme Court heard oral argument last week in Minerva Surgical Inc. v. Hologic, Inc. over the issue of assignor estoppel. As a reminder, the case arose in an infringement suit over U.S. Patent Nos. 6,782,183 and...more
On January 8, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear a case calling for it to abolish or limit the doctrine of assignor estoppel. See Minerva Surgical, Inc. v. Hologic, Inc., et al., No. 20-440, 2021 WL 77248 (U.S. Jan....more
HOLOGIC, INC. v. MINERVA SURGICAL, INC. Before Wallach, Clevenger, and Stoll. Appeals from the United States District Court District of Delaware. Summary: The doctrine of assignor estoppel precludes an assignor from...more
The inventor on the patent, Dr. Cheriton, was employed by Cisco as a technical advisor and chief product architect at the time he filed the application that led to the patent. Dr. Cheriton assigned all rights to the...more
A preliminary decision in the District Court of Delaware introduces the possibility that a patentee’s victory on assignor estoppel in the district court could quash a co-pending IPR proceeding at the PTAB. Assignor estoppel...more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) issued Final Written Decisions regarding Cisco’s U.S. Patent Nos. 6,377,577 (the “’577 Patent”) and 7,023,853 (the “’853 Patent”) on May 25, 2017 and U.S. Patent No. 7,224,668 (the...more
The Federal Circuit recently determined that it lacked jurisdiction to review the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s determination that assignor estoppel has no affect in an inter partes review (“IPR”). The majority’s decision...more