On June 6, 2025, the acting Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), Coke Morgan Stewart, issued a decision in iRhythm Technologies v. Welch Allyn, Inc.1 that initiates a new basis for discretionary denial...more
This issue of The PTAB Review begins with recent developments at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) under the new administration, then summarizes two recent Federal Circuit decisions relevant to the PTAB practice....more
The PTAB Review begins by exploring collateral estoppel from unpatentability determinations in inter partes review (IPR) proceedings. Next, it summarizes recent developments at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office relevant to...more
This issue of The PTAB Review begins by providing an analysis of how institution decisions consider declaration testimony submitted by a patent owner. Next, it summarizes proposed rulemaking from the United States Patent and...more
This issue of The PTAB Review begins by summarizing a recent Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decision strictly applying the public availability standard for prior art references as a basis for denying institution. Next,...more
Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati is pleased to present our 2023 PTAB Year in Review.
We begin with a review of 2023 petition filings and outcomes at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) of the U.S. Patent and...more
In this edition, we begin with a discussion of recent trends in sanctions practice at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). Next, we summarize several recent Federal Circuit decisions addressing various aspects of PTAB...more
This issue begins with a summary of several Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) policy questions the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has raised in an advance notice of proposed rulemaking. Next, we examine two...more
This issue of The PTAB Review begins with a brief update about the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO) Guidelines for when institution of an America Invents Act (AIA) trial (e.g., inter partes review or post-grant review)...more
This issue of The PTAB Review begins with two brief updates about the power of the Patent Office Director to review Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decisions. Next, we examine a special circumstance under which a patent...more
The firm's post-grant practice is pleased to present its 2020 PTAB Year in Review. The publication begins with a review of 2020 petition filings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and takes a closer look at the...more
The America Invents Act (AIA) authorizes the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) to cancel patent claims that never should have been issued but prohibits the PTAB from acting on petitions for review brought more than one...more
4/23/2020
/ § 314(d) ,
§ 315(b) ,
§314(a) ,
§314(b) ,
America Invents Act ,
Appeals ,
Dissenting Opinions ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Judicial Review ,
Non-Appealable Decisions ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
SCOTUS ,
Thryv Inc v Click-To-Call Technologies LP ,
Time-Barred Claims ,
Vacated
On March 23, 2020, a fractured Federal Circuit issued a precedential order denying rehearing en banc in Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., No. 2018-2140. On October 31, 2019, a three-judge Federal Circuit panel before...more
On October 31, 2019, a Federal Circuit panel issued Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., holding that administrative patent judges (APJs) of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) were unconstitutionally-appointed...more