New Developments in Obviousness-Type Double Patenting and Original Patent Requirements — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Are Your Granted Patents in Danger of a Post-Grant Double Patenting Challenge?
Behaving Badly: OpenSky v. VLSI and Sanctions at the PTAB — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Scott McKeown Discusses PTAB Trends and Growth of Wolf Greenfield’s Washington, DC Office
USPTO Director Review — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Disputing Patent-Eligible Subject Matter in PGRs and IPRs - Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Reexamination in IPR and PGR Practice – Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Reissue in IPR and PGR Practice – Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Reissue vs. Reexamination in IPR and PGR Practice - Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
3 Key Takeaways | Third party Prior Art Submissions at USPTO
Discretionary Denials at the PTAB: What to Expect? - Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Fish Post-Grant Radio: Episode #14: Tom Rozylowicz
Motions to Amend: PTO Pilot Program Extended - Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
[IP Hot Topics Podcast] Innovation Conversations: Andrei Iancu
Fallout from the Fintiv Precedential Decision
Talking PTAB with Bob Steinberg
Indefiniteness Before the PTAB
Is The Deck Stacked Against Patent Owners In The PTAB?
As part of the recovery from the global COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit took steps to return to normal operations. It began requiring live oral arguments in August 2022 and, by November,...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied mandamus relief, finding that a party is not entitled to petition the director for review of a Patent Trial & Appeal Board (Board) decision denying institution of an...more
Summary: The USPTO policy of refusing to consider Requests for Director Rehearing of decisions denying institution of IPR and PGR does not violate the Appointments Clause of the Constitution....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
[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
Year-End Analysis and Future Forecasts on the Most Significant Developments Impacting Post-Grant Proceedings. Attend ACI’s inaugural PTAB Practice Briefing virtually on December 2nd for in-depth discussions and year-end...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
On July 6th and 7th, the USPTO made good on its promise to not wait for a confirmed director to begin Arthrex Director reviews, issuing its first denials of review requests. The full press release is below:...more
On June 21, 2021, the Supreme Court handed down a highly-anticipated decision in United States v. Arthrex, Inc., finding that Administrative Patent Judges (“APJs”)—the judges who sit on Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”)...more
Ever since institution of the post-grant review proceedings enacted under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act were implemented by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (through the newly constituted Patent Trial and Appeal...more
[co-author: Kathleen Wills] Last year, the global COVID-19 pandemic created unprecedented challenges for American courts. By making several changes, however, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was able to...more
On Friday, May 1, 2020, Chief Administrative Patent Judge Scott R. Boalick of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) paused all activity in the significant number of PTAB cases remanded to it from the Federal Circuit...more
As we close out another calendar year, we look back at the top legal developments of 2019 that could influence the market for biologics and biosimilars. These five major court decisions will likely impact the legal strategy...more
The Appointments Clause of the U.S. Constitution1 provides that “principal officers” of the United States must be appointed by the President upon the advice and consent of the Senate. “Inferior officers,” on the other hand,...more
This document provides a factual overview of the Federal Circuit’s decision in Arthrex v. Smith & Nephew, discusses the court’s remedy, and addresses implications for litigants with Patent Trial and Appeal Board cases pending...more
In a surprising precedential ruling, with the potential to vacate past decisions by administrative patent judges (“APJs”) of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”), the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled...more
Customedia Tech., LLC v. Dish Network Corp.., Appeal Nos. 2018-2239, -2240, -2310, 2019-1000, -1001, -1002, -1027 and -1029 (Fed. Cir., Nov. 1, 2019). The day after the Federal Circuit issued its decision in Arthrex, Inc....more
On October 31, 2019, a three-judge panel of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ("CAFC") issued a decision, authored by Judge Moore, in Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., No. 18-2140. The CAFC held that the...more
Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., Appeal No. 2018-2140 (Fed. Cir., October 31, 2019) - Since the inception of inter partes review at the Patent Trial and Appeals Board (PTAB), there have been a number of...more
Yesterday October 31, 2019, a 3-judge panel of the Federal Circuit (Judges Moore, Reyna, and Chen) issued a unanimous decision holding that the USPTO’s appointment practice for Administrative Patent Judges (APJs) violates the...more
n a decision with potential far-reaching implications, Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., the Federal Circuit held Thursday that appointments of Administrative Patent Judges (“APJs”) of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s...more