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
In IOENGINE, LLC v. Ingenico Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2025), the Federal Circuit narrowed the scope of IPR estoppel under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2), which precludes an IPR petitioner from asserting in court that a patent claim “is invalid...more
Tocilizumab Challenged Claim Types in IPRs: Claims are counted in each IPR, so claims from the same patent challenged in multiple IPRs are counted more than once. Within each IPR, claims are counted only once, whether they...more
In Pacific Biosciences of California, Inc. v. Personal Genomics Taiwan, Inc., the Federal Circuit recently affirmed two PTAB decisions in IPRs filed by Pacific Biosciences of California, Inc. (PacBio) that challenged a...more
Hosted by ACI, 18th Annual Paragraph IV Disputes Conference returns to New York City for another exciting year with curated programming that not only addresses the hot topics, but also puts them within the context of pre-suit...more
ACI’s 8th Annual Paragraph IV Disputes Master Symposium returns in person to Chicago on September 21-22! Join leading pharmaceutical patent litigators for brand name and generic drug companies to receive up-to-the-minute...more
On February 8, 2022, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit determined that certain restrictions on the ability to challenge the validity of patents are enforceable. Without such restrictions, companies that are...more
[co-author: Jamie Dohopolski] Last year, the continued global COVID-19 pandemic forced American courts to largely continue the procedures set in place in 2020. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was no...more
The Federal Circuit’s recent ruling in MaxPower Semiconductor Inc. et al v. Rohm Semiconductor USA, LLC highlights the interplay between the liberal federal policy favoring arbitration agreements and the Patent Trial and...more
Most patents challenged in inter partes review (IPR) proceedings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) are involved in co-pending litigation. A threshold question is whether litigation counsel will also handle the IPR...more
On September 29, 2021, the Federal Circuit in In re: Vivint, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2021) held that 35 U.S.C. § 325(d) applies to both inter partes review (IPR) petitions and requests for ex parte reexamination. Accordingly, the...more
Join the conference that the “who’s who” of Hatch-Waxman litigators have designated as the forum which sets the standards for Paragraph IV practice. ACI’s Paragraph IV Litigation Conference is returning LIVE & IN-PERSON to...more
When filing an IPR, petitioners should be careful not to take for granted one of the most fundamental aspects of challenging validity in this forum: Whether or not the relied upon references qualify as prior art. Pursuant to...more
Petitioners and Patent Owners alike have started filing stipulations in district court and at the International Trade Commission to leverage the Fintiv factors in their favor on the issue of discretionary denial at the Patent...more
[co-author: Jay Bober, Summer Associate] 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...more
This blog has previously discussed the Federal Circuit’s decision in Becton, Dickinson and Co. v. Baxter Corp. Englewood, — F.3d —, No. 2020-1937, 2021 WL 2176796 (Fed. Cir. May 28, 2021). See Telepharma Disconnect: Federal...more
[co-author: Yuke Wang, Patent Agent] 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...more
A patent interference is an inter partes proceeding to determine which party was the first to invent commonly claimed subject matter. An interference is also a viable procedure for challenging the validity of an issued patent...more
San Francisco Partner Paul Haughey shares six things you should know about inter partes review....more
After the Supreme Court’s 2019 decision in Return Mail, Inc. v. United States Postal Service, 139 S. Ct. 1853 (2019), held that federal agencies are not “persons” eligible to challenge a patent at the PTAB, the government was...more
On June 20, 2019, the United States Supreme Court held that government entities could not be considered “persons” entitled to challenge patents owned by others before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)....more
Recently, the Federal Circuit issued a series of decisions that address the rights and immunities that the federal and state government have when they become party to a post-grant proceeding before the Patent Trial and Appeal...more
In Return Mail, Inc. v. U.S. Postal Serv., 17-1594, Justice SOTOMAYOR wrote for the majority to overturn a Federal Circuit decision that the U.S. Postal Service had standing to petition for covered business method review. The...more
The Supreme Court ruled in Return Mail that a federal agency is not a "person" who may challenge an issued patent in inter partes review, post-grant review, or CBM review under the AIA. In its 6–3 decision in Return Mail,...more
In a 6-3 opinion authored by Justice Sotomayor, the Supreme Court held that the Federal Government is not a “person” capable of petitioning the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) to institute patent review proceedings...more