News & Analysis as of

Patents Director of the USPTO Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding

WilmerHale

PTAB/USPTO Update - April 2025

WilmerHale on

On March 10, John Squires was officially nominated to be Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office....more

Jones Day

PTAB Announces a Bifurcated Process for Consideration of IPR and PGR Petitions

Jones Day on

A new interim process for the acting director to exercise discretion as to whether to institute an inter partes review ("IPR") or a post-grant review ("PGR") was announced on March 26, 2025, in which discretionary...more

Kilpatrick

PTAB: Initial Fallout from the New Director Guidance on Discretionary Denial of Institution

Kilpatrick on

Last week, my partner Justin Krieger published an alert regarding Acting Director Stewart's new guidance on discretionary denial. Shortly thereafter, Acting Director Stewart issued a decision vacating institution of several...more

Jones Day

PTAB Announces Bifurcated Process for Consideration of Discretionary Denial Issues

Jones Day on

A new interim process for the Director to exercise discretion as to whether to institute an inter partes review(IPR) or a post grant review (PGR) was announced on March 26, 2025, in which discretionary considerations and...more

Foley Hoag LLP

PTAB Changes Procedure for Determining Discretionary Denials

Foley Hoag LLP on

Key Takeaways: - The Director, in consultation with at least three APJs, will now decide the discretionary denial question, rather than having the merits panel decide the issue. - Discretionary denial will have separate...more

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

Reexamination of Expired Patents

Takeaways - - Expired patents may be eligible for reexamination. - Owner’s options during reexamination of an expired patent are severely limited. Similar to reexamination practice, which has long allowed reexamination...more

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

PTAB Year in Review – USPTO Rulemaking in 2024 Related to PTAB Practice and Procedures

The final year of Director Vidal’s tenure as the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office was a busy year for rulemaking at the Office. Since late 2023, five Notices of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRMs) directly related to...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

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

Erise IP

Eye on IPRs: November 2024: USPTO Director to Step Down, Did Fed. Circuit DISH Asks Full Fed. Cir. Panel to Reconsider Vacating...

Erise IP on

Every month, Erise’s patent attorneys review the latest inter partes review cases and news to bring you the stories that you should know about: USPTO Director Vidal to Step Down - On November 12, Under Secretary of...more

Erise IP

Eye on IPRs, October 2024: USPTO Issues Final PTAB Procedure Rules

Erise IP on

Every month, Erise’s patent attorneys review the latest inter partes review cases and news to bring you the stories that you should know about: USPTO Issues Final Rules on PTAB Procedure - The U.S. Patent and...more

Erise IP

Eye on IPRs, August 2024: Federal Circuit Rules on Arguments Not Raised in Request for Rehearing, USPTO Director’s Potential...

Erise IP on

Every month, Erise’s patent attorneys review the latest inter partes review cases and news to bring you the stories that you should know about: Federal Circuit Addresses Waiver of Argument Not Raised in Request for...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

McDermott Will & Emery

Drawing Can Teach Claim Limitations If “Clear on Its Face”

McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing when a drawing in a prior art reference includes a teaching that is “clear on its face,” the Director of the US Patent & Trademark Office vacated and remanded a Patent Trial & Appeal Board decision denying...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

McDermott Will & Emery

New PTAB Claim Construction? Give the Parties Review Opportunity

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO) Director vacated Final Written Decisions issued by the Patent Trial & Appeal Board that presented a sua sponte construction of a claim term in dispute, holding that the parties were not...more

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

2023 PTAB Year in Review: Editors’ Introduction

A review of 2023 reveals it was an active and impactful year in shaping the policy and practice before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). In fact, all three...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - January 2024 #4

Roku, Inc. v. International Trade Commission, Appeal No. 2022-1386 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 19, 2024) In an appeal from the International Trade Commission (the “Commission”), the Federal Circuit addressed a number of findings...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Sins of the Fathers? Grandparent IPR Factors into Current Institution Decision

US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO) Director Kathi Vidal vacated and remanded a Patent Trial & Appeal Board decision denying institution of an inter partes review (IPR) because the Board improperly applied the precedential...more

McDermott Will & Emery

No Need for Unnecessary RPI Determinations

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Patent & Trademark Office Director partially vacated the Patent Trial & Appeal Board’s real-party-in-interest (RPI) determination because that determination was not necessary to resolve the underlying proceeding....more

McDermott Will & Emery

Pending Appeal Does Not Divest Board of Statutory Authority to Institute IPRs

McDermott Will & Emery on

In a case involving sua sponte review, the Director of the US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO) vacated an inter partes review (IPR) decision denying institution, found that the Patent Trial & Appeal Board had statutory...more

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

PTAB Strategies and Insights Newsletter - May 2023: Case Highlights: PTAB Precedential and Informative Decisions, Director Review...

This recurring feature highlights any new PTAB precedential and/or informative decisions, any new substantive Director review decisions, and any new substantive decisions issued by the Precedential Opinion Panel (POP). The...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Compelling Clarity: PTO Director Explains Compelling Merits Test

US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO) Director Katherine K. Vidal issued a precedential opinion clarifying the standard under which the Patent Trial & Appeal Board (Board) can institute on an inter partes review (IPR) petition...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Review Delayed Is Not Review Denied

McDermott Will & Emery on

Considering whether the US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO) Director must complete review of the Patent Trial & Appeal Board’s (Board) inter partes review (IPR) decision within the statutory deadline for a final written...more

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

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2022 Decisions: Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., 35 F.4th...

Smith & Nephew petitioned for IPR of Arthrex’s ’907 patent, which claims a surgical device with an “eyelet” through which a suture is threaded. Smith & Nephew argued in relevant part that certain claims were anticipated by a...more

49 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

"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