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
Published Patent Applications Are Prior Art as of the Filing Date, Not the Publication Date - Lynk Labs raises a simple question of statutory interpretation with surprisingly important ramifications: in inter partes review,...more
In a precedential final written decision, the Patent Trial & Appeal Board concluded that a patent does not need to contain a claim supported by a provisional application’s disclosure to draw priority to that provisional for...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
In 2021, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued four opinions regarding US design patents— two precedential opinions and two unprecedential opinions. Both precedential opinions, In re SurgiSil and Campbell...more
This year, we will mark the 10-year anniversary of the first jury verdict in the landmark IP litigation between Apple and Samsung, which resulted in the jury awarding more than $1B to Apple. More than $500M of that award was...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that facilitating browsing of documents on a website was sufficient to support public accessibility of prior art references, but that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board...more
In Uniloc 2017 LLC v. Hulu, LLC, Netflix, Inc. (July 22, 2020), the Federal Circuit held that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“the PTAB”) may consider, in its review of substitute claims proposed in an inter partes review...more
On July 22, 2020, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal Circuit) issued an opinion in Uniloc 2017 LLC v. Hulu, LLC & Netflix, Inc., No. 2019-1686 (Fed. Cir. 2020) authorizing the U.S. Patent Trial &...more
Yesterday we discussed the Federal Circuit’s decision in Uniloc 2017 LLC v. Hulu, LLC confirming the Board’s authority to review contingent substitute claims after the original claims have been held invalid by a federal...more
Last week, in Uniloc 2017 LLC v. Hulu, LLC, the Federal Circuit ruled that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board may consider patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101 for substitute claims. The appeal raises issues of finality...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
UNILOC 2017 LLC v. HULU, LLC - Before O’Malley, Wallach, and Taranto. O’Malley dissenting. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: The Board did not exceed its statutory authority in an inter partes...more
Secret Third-Party Processes May Not Trigger Pre-AIA § 102 Public Knowledge or Use Bars - In Basf Corporation v. SNF Holding Company, Appeal No. 19-1243, the Federal Circuit ruled that a third party’s sale of products...more
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - BASF Corporation v. SNF Holding Company, Appeal No. 2019-1243 (Fed. Cir. April 8, 2020) - This week’s case of the week concerns issues relating to the “known or used by others in this country,”...more
United States Automobile Association (USAA), a financial services company that provides insurance, banking, investment, and retirement products and services for members of the military and their families, filed a surprising...more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) designated as precedential four decisions addressing America Invents Act proceedings and issues of live testimony at oral argument and motions to amend under 35 USC § 316(d)....more
Although the Federal Circuit has analyzed the qualifications of prior art printed publications since its inception, the precise standards for public accessibility have become dramatically more important under PTAB...more
In 2018, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit docketed close to 600 appeals from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). That is the second highest number since starting to hear post-American Invents Act...more
An IPR of issued patent claims is statutorily limited to prior art challenges based on patents and printed publications under § 102 (novelty) or § 103 (obviousness). The PTAB may not institute an IPR of existing patent claims...more
Federal Circuit Summary - Before Lourie, Dyk and Taranto. Consolidated Appeals from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and the Southern District of California. Summary: A person is a joint inventor of the anticipating...more
The PTAB may institute IPR proceedings only on the basis of certain prior art that is potentially invalidating under § 102 (novelty) or § 103 (obviousness). The PTAB may not institute IPR on any other unpatentability grounds,...more
Last year, the Federal Circuit vacated the Board’s original decision denying the patent owner’s motion to amend two claims in IPR2014-00090, holding that the Board erred by “insist[ing] that the patent owner discuss whether...more
In connection with a dispute over parking meters, the PTAB, on March 27, 2017, issued a decision in IPR2016-00067 that Duncan Parking Technologies, Inc. (DPT) had not met its burden of showing, by a preponderance of evidence,...more
In a precedential opinion dated March 14, 2017, the Federal Circuit reversed the PTAB, holding that in finding a claim anticipated under 35 USC § 102, the Board cannot “fill in missing limitations” simply because a skilled...more