News & Analysis as of

Patents Stays Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding

Proskauer Rose LLP

Ventures in Venue: Selecting the Proper Patent Venue

Proskauer Rose LLP on

Amongst the many decisions an attorney makes throughout litigation, there is one choice that can shape the outcome of a case way before filing a motion, setting discovery and trial strategy, or even calling a witness: venue,...more

Fish & Richardson

Texas Patent Litigation Monthly Wrap-Up: October 2024

Fish & Richardson on

This post summarizes two federal patent cases from the Eastern District and Western District of Texas issued in October 2024. The decisions considered the defendants’ motions to stay the cases pending the resolution of inter...more

Goodwin

PTAB Institutes Sarepta’s IPR

Goodwin on

As we previously reported, REGENXBIO’s litigation against Sarepta, alleging infringement of U.S. Patent No. 11,680,274 (the “’274 patent”) by Sarepta’s gene therapy product, was stayed pending resolution of Sarepta’s IPR...more

Fish & Richardson

Texas Patent Litigation Monthly Wrap-Up: July 2024

Fish & Richardson on

Our Texas Patent Litigation Monthly Wrap-Up for July 2024 covers three decisions of interest from the Eastern District of Texas granting motions related to subject matter eligibility, stays pending inter partes review (IPR),...more

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

Time May Not Be on Your Side: Judge Ho Allows the Addition of New Parties Discovered During Stay

Defendants in patent cases should be wary of the possibility that a plaintiff will attempt to add new defendants after a stay for inter partes review is lifted. In a pending case involving patents directed to “space...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Defendant’s Non-Party Status to IPRs Dooms Stay Request, Despite Agreement to Be Bound by IPR Estoppel

The Western District of Texas recently denied a defendant’s motion to stay pending inter partes review based in part on the defendant’s status as a non-party in the IPR proceedings. In doing so, the district court focused on...more

Fish & Richardson

Texas Patent Litigation Monthly Wrap-Up: April 2023

Fish & Richardson on

Four subjects stood out in patent litigation in Texas in April 2023: (1) applicability of the customer-suit exception to the first-to-file rule; (2) the level of ties a reasonable royalty methodology must have to the facts of...more

Jones Day

Fintiv Discretionary Denials Remain In Play

Jones Day on

F5 Networks, Inc. (“Petitioner”) filed a Petition requesting an IPR.  WSOU Investments, LLC d/b/a/ Brazos Licensing and Development (“Patent Owner”) filed a Preliminary Response. ...more

Jones Day

PTAB Lifts Arthrex Remand Stay

Jones Day on

On October 26, 2021, Chief Administrative Patent Judge (“APJ”) Boalick lifted a May 1, 2020 stay issued by the PTAB pending the Supreme Court’s consideration of Arthrex in which 103 cases were placed in “administrative...more

Porter Hedges LLP

To Stay Or Not To Stay: The Impact Of IPRs On Patent Litigation

Porter Hedges LLP on

Over the course of the past year, trial attorneys in state and federal courts have seen cases effectively stayed by COVID-related delays. COVID hampered in-person discovery and caused courts to re-set jury trial dates. Such...more

Jones Day

Staying Still: District Court Extends Stay Pending Appeal

Jones Day on

District courts commonly stay patent litigation cases pending inter parties review (IPR) that assesses the validity of the patents-in-suit before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). Such stay may be lifted or extended...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

N.D. Ill.: Neither Statutory Estoppel nor “Misleading” Statements Regarding Its Scope Sufficient to Knock Out Invalidity Defenses

A district court has ruled that the scope of IPR estoppel under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2) did not apply to invalidity grounds that relied on physical products. The court also declined to apply judicial estoppel, notwithstanding...more

Troutman Pepper Locke

U.S. Government in Search of Arthrex Reversal

Troutman Pepper Locke on

Image Processing Technologies LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co., LTD. et al., Appeal Nos. 2018-2156, 2019-1408, 2019-1485 (Fed. Cir. March 2, 2020). The Federal Circuit vacated and remanded the PTAB’s decisions against Image...more

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

Stay In Place: Judge Azrack Declines to Lift Stay Until Federal Circuit Weighs In

On August 6, 2019, United States District Judge Joan M. Azrack denied Plaintiff Andrea Electronics Corporation (“Andrea”)’s motion to lift the stay in Andrea Electronics Corp. v. Apple Inc., No. 16-cv-5220 (E.D.N.Y.) and,...more

Jones Day

ITC Denies Motion to Stay After Weighing Semiconductor Chips Factors

Jones Day on

In a recent order, the ITC denied a motion to stay after ALJ Bullock found that the balance of the Semiconductor Chips factors weighed against granting the motion. See In re Certain Memory Modules And Components Thereof, Inv....more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Lift of Stay Disallowed by District Court Post-SAS in View of PTAB’s Final Written Decision Lacking Non-Instituted Claims

The Delaware District Court issued an order on June 7, 2018 denying a party’s motion to lift a stay following the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) final written decision in a parallel inter partes review (IPR)...more

Knobbe Martens

The Federal Circuit Stays IPR Pending Review of the PTAB’s Denial of St. Regis Mohawk Tribe’s Sovereign Immunity

Knobbe Martens on

The PTAB ruled that the Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe could not assert sovereign immunity in IPRs of patents that Allergan had assigned to the Tribe relating to Restasis®. See The Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe is not entitled to...more

Jones Day

Federal Circuit Stay Order Demonstrates Value of Redesign as Defense in ITC Actions

Jones Day on

The Federal Circuit has determined to partially stay an ITC exclusion order as it pertains to products redesigned after the remedial orders issued. We have previously posted about Certain Network Devices, Related Software and...more

Jones Day

Federal Circuit Denies Motion to Stay Pending Supreme Court Decision in Oil States

Jones Day on

On June 12, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in Oil States Energy Servs., LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC, to decide whether inter partes review (IPR) violates the Constitution by extinguishing patent rights...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

PTAB Invalidates Two Cisco Patents Found Valid and Infringed at the ITC

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

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Summaries of All Supreme Court and Precedential Federal Circuit Patent Cases Decided Since Jun. 1, 2016

This paper is based on reports on precedential patent cases decided by the Federal Circuit distributed by Peter Heuser on a weekly basis. ...more

Knobbe Martens

Magistrate Judge Recommends IPR Estoppel Bar of Prior Art References

Knobbe Martens on

A magistrate judge in the Eastern District of Texas recommended in Biscotti, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., No. 2:13-CV-01015, DI 191 (E.D. Tex. May 11, 2017) that Microsoft should be estopped from asserting invalidity grounds that...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Three Reasons PTAB Litigation Costs More Than We Thought

Robins Kaplan LLP on

The America Invents Act (AIA) has been in effect from more than a year and half. Now, many have begun to ask if the patent office trials the AIA created are living up to their promise of lowering patent litigation costs and...more

23 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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