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 hypothetical person with ordinary skill in the art will have a certain amount of requisite experience in the subject matter of the patent at the time of the invention of the patent....more
A district court recently precluded a patent attorney from testifying as an expert in a patent infringement lawsuit where the proposed expert lacked the requisite technical expertise to assist the trier of fact in...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court decision finding that two patents covering enantiomerically pure compositions of the psoriasis drug Otezla® (apremilast) were valid and one patent...more
In Kyocera Senco Industrial Tools Inc. v. International Trade Commission, the Federal Circuit held in a precedential opinion that expert witnesses must at least have ordinary skill in the art. Because Kyocera’s expert did not...more
In an appeal, Novartis Pharmaceuticals v. Accord Healthcare, Inc., the issue of whether a patent provides sufficient written description of a negative limitation split the panel at the Federal Circuit. Novartis...more
The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return on investment for all stakeholders looking at the entire...more
The US Patent Trial and Appeal Board on December 23, 2021, instituted an inter partes review even though an unrelated party had already unsuccessfully challenged the validity of the patent in district court. In the decision...more
The expert declaration provides a unique opportunity for Patent Owners to bolster their case during the discovery period of an inter partes review (“IPR”) proceeding. We previously detailed how to effectively use an expert...more
The availability of post-grant proceedings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has changed the face of patent litigation. This monthly digest is designed to keep you up-to-date by highlighting interesting PTAB,...more
As we demonstrated in our own successful appeal, Arendi S.A.R.L. v. Apple Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2016), a petition for inter partes review (“IPR”) may fail when an expert declaration lacks detailed explanation. An expert’s...more
The Federal Circuit recently reaffirmed a case where common sense was used to supply a missing element in a § 103 obviousness analysis. On June 26, 2020, the Federal Circuit issued a decision in B/E Aerospace, Inc. v. C&D...more
In a precedential decision in HVLPO2, LLC v. Oxygen Frog, LLC, the Federal Circuit held that non-expert testimony on obviousness is inadmissible, further finding that the district court abused its discretion by allowing a lay...more
In Kaneka Corporation v. Zhejiang Medicine, the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California held that expert testimony alone was sufficient to avoid summary judgment of indefiniteness under 35 U.S.C. § 112 ¶ 2,...more
In 2016, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit docketed more appeals from the US Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) than any other venue—a first in its over 30-year history. The post grant proceedings created by the...more
Federal Circuit Summaries - Before Wallach, Chen, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nebraska. Summary: Reexaminations of patents confirming validity are not dispositive of...more
Applying its previous rulings in related litigation and interpreting FTC v. Actavis, 570 U.S. 756 (2013), the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania was tasked with determining whether to preclude expert...more