The Appointments Clause: Ensuring That PTAB Decisions Are Subject to Constitutional Checks and Balances In Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., Appeal No. 18-2251, the Federal Circuit ruled that, under the then-existing...more
On Thursday of last week in Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v. TCL Corporation, the Federal Circuit affirmed two Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decisions (IPR2015-01584 and IPR2015-01600) finding that a single claim in...more
With the implementation of the America Invents Act and the United States moving to a first-to-file regime, there is greater time pressure to file patent applications than ever before. When patent protection in ex-US...more
In Limestone Memory Systems LLC v. Micron Technology, Inc. et al., the Discovery Master ruled that, under 9th Circuit law, pre-suit, patent analysis documents qualified for immunity from discovery under the work product...more
In a recent order, Administrative Law Judge Shaw denied in part the Respondents’ Motion to Supplement their Notice of Prior Art. In re Certain Strontium-Rubidium Radioisotope Infusion Systems, And Components Thereof Including...more
As we previously reported, following the Supreme Court’s June 12, 2017 decision in Sandoz v. Amgen, the Federal Circuit on July 26, 2017, issued an order recalling its October 23, 2015 mandate, reinstating the appeal, and...more
Addressing the requirements to offer supplemental evidence and information, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) denied the patent owner’s requests for authorization to file a motion to submit supplemental...more
The PTAB at the Federal Circuit -- Supplemental Evidence Edition - On New Year's Eve, the Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB's denial of a motion to submit supplemental evidence pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.123(a),...more
Addressing whether a petitioner in an inter partes review (IPR) can respond to a patent owner’s preliminary response, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (PTO) Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) denied the...more
American Honda Motor Co., Inc. v. American Vehicular Sciences LLC - The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) concluded that a party need not renew an objection to evidence if...more
National Environmental Products Ltd. v. Dri-Steem Corp.; PNC Bank National Ass’n v. Secure Axcess, LLC - In two recent decisions demonstrating that amending a petition for inter partes review (IPR) with supplemental...more
FLIR Systems, Inc. v. Leak Surveys, Inc. - Addressing whether prior-art-related submissions by a petitioner in an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding are supplemental information under 37 C.F.R. 42.123(a) or...more