Jones Day Talks: PTAB's Busy Docket and What's Changed After SAS Institute
Podcast: PTAB Changes After SAS: New Litigation Tactics & Further Changes to Come
On December 8th, the PTAB published a Final Rule, formalizing a number of PTAB practices dictated by case law and described in the current Trial Practice Guide. The one substantive change of note is the removal to deference...more
WHAT DO WE KNOW? 1. On July 22, 2020, a sharply split Federal Circuit panel held that “[t]he PTAB correctly concluded that it is not limited by § 311(b) in its review of proposed substitute claims in an IPR, and that it...more
On June 11, 2020, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) held a Boardside Chat webinar to discuss new developments in AIA trials. The discussion featured panelists Vice Chief Judge Michael Tierney and Lead Judge William...more
With this decision, the US Supreme Court again prioritizes giving the US Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) a second chance to review and potentially weed out “bad patents,” over permitting parties the opportunity to challenge...more
Yesterday, in Thryv, Inc. v. Click-to-Call Technologies, LP[i], the Supreme Court ruled that the provisions of 35 U.S.C. § 315(b)[ii], which preclude a petitioner from filing an inter partes review petition more than one year...more
In Thryv, Inc. v. Click-to-Call Technologies, LP the Supreme Court held, 7-2, that patent owners cannot appeal determinations by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) declining to apply the time-bar of 35 U.S.C. § 315(b)....more
Defendants sued for patent infringement in district court commonly seek litigation stays based on an American Invents Act (AIA)-contested proceeding that assesses the validity of the patents-in-suit before the Patent Trial...more
In August 2018, the Patent Office foreshadowed that the Board would be expanding the use of its discretion under 35 U.S.C. §§ 314(a)/324(a) and 325(d) to deny petitions. The Office explained that “[t]here may be other reasons...more
In November 2019, the United States Patent and Trademark Office published a second edition of the America Invents Act (AIA) Trial Practice Guide (Practice Guide) to incorporate the Practice Guide updates released in August...more
On June 24, 2019, the Supreme Court granted the petition for certiorari in Thryv, Inc. fka Dex Media Inc. v. Click-to-Call Technologies, LP on the question of whether 35 U.S.C. § 314(d) permits appeal of the Patent Trial and...more
White & Case Technology Newsflash - On December 9, 2019, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Thryv, Inc. v. Click-to-Call Technologies, Case No. 18-916. The case involves the proper application of Section 315(b) of the...more
On April 5, 2019, the PTAB designated as informative two decisions relating to 35 U.S.C. § 314(a): - Chevron Oronite Co. LLC v. Infineum USA L.P., Case IPR2018-00923, Paper 9 (Nov. 7, 2018) (designated: Apr. 5, 2019) [AIA...more
SAS sought an inter partes review (IPR) of ComplementSoft’s patent. In its petition, SAS alleged that all of the patent’s claims were unpatentable. The PTAB determined to institute trial on some, but not all, of the...more
This year the Supreme Court, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and the Federal District Courts penned a number of opinions impacting patent law. Here are some key takeaways from the past year....more
Addressing whether the review of a single claim on a single challenged ground in a petition may be sufficient to institute inter partes review (IPR) for all challenged claims on all challenged grounds, the Patent Trial and...more
As an update to the May 15, 2018 post, available here, some post-SAS trends appear to be taking shape. For the five-month period from May 2018 through September 2018, the PTAB issued 538 institution decisions. Of these, the...more
AIA Institution Rates Following Supreme Court’s SAS Decision - On April 24, 2018, the Supreme Court issued its decision in SAS Institute v. Iancu, holding that when the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) institutes an...more
In light of the Supreme Court of the United States decision in SAS Institute v. Iancu (IP Update, Vol. 21, No. 5), the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit remanded an appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board...more
On April 24, 2018, the Supreme Court issued its decision in SAS Institute Inc. v. Iancu 138 S. Ct. 1348 (2018). SAS involved a challenge to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (Board) practice of instituting inter partes...more
The recent decision in SAS Institute v. Iancu — in combination with the proposed shift from a broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) standard to the Phillips standard for claim construction used in district court — moves...more
In This Issue - US Taxation of IP After Tax Reform - U.S. taxation of intellectual property has become astoundingly more complex after the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. The new rules are so complex that the IRS and Treasury...more
Orange Book-Listed Patents Prove to Be Popular Targets for AIA Challenges - On March 13, 2018, Chief Administrative Patent Judge Ruschke of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) released findings of the Patent Office’s...more
On April 24, 2018, in SAS Institute Inc. v. Iancu, a closely divided U.S. Supreme Court fundamentally changed the way that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board confronts inter partes reviews under the America Invents Act. The...more
In a quartet of recent decisions, the Federal Circuit has confirmed that SAS Institute extends beyond mandating the inclusion of all claims when trial is instituted, and extends to all grounds as well. These decisions confirm...more
On June 5, 2018, Chief Judge David Ruschke and Vice Chief Judge Tim Fink of the Patent Trial and Appeals Board (PTAB) participated in a webinar providing new guidance on three topics: (1) the new claim construction standard...more