The Patent Trial and Appeal Board has denied institution of an inter partes review, in part because the petitioner failed to show that a key reference qualified as prior art. The PTAB ruled that the petitioner was required to...more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board has denied institution of a post-grant review proceeding because the petitioner failed to show the challenged patent was eligible for PGR. The PTAB ruled that the petitioner’s evidence,...more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board denied institution of a petition for inter partes review (IPR), in part because an allegedly anticipatory prior art patent lacked an element of what the board determined was a limiting...more
Objective evidence of nonobviousness traces its roots to 19th century case law from the U.S. Supreme Court.
The analysis of such secondary considerations as commercial success, failure of others, and long-felt but...more
A district court has ruled that the scope of IPR estoppel under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2) did not apply to invalidity grounds that relied on physical products. The court also declined to apply judicial estoppel, notwithstanding...more
A petition for inter partes review (IPR) has been denied because the petitioner failed to rebut the patent owner’s claim of priority raised in its preliminary response. In denying institution, the Patent Trial and Appeal...more
An accused infringer in a district court case could not take advantage of a prior claim construction ruling from an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding involving unasserted claims of the same patent. The Patent Trial and...more
In a remanded inter partes review (IPR) proceeding, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) held that Patent Owner Intellectual Ventures II LLC had successfully antedated a prior art reference asserted by Petitioner Motorola...more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has rejected a patent owner’s argument that judicial estoppel should prevent a petitioner from making obviousness arguments in support of its petition for inter partes review (IPR)....more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board has granted in part a Patent Owner’s motion to strike Petitioner’s Reply for improperly raising new arguments and citing new evidence. The Board, however, declined to throw out the entirety...more
10/14/2019
/ Expert Testimony ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Motion To Strike ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Prosecution History ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Petitioner Reply Briefs ,
Prior Art ,
SAS Institute Inc. v Iancu ,
State of the Art Defense
A Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) panel has denied institution of an inter partes review proceeding because the petitioner did not establish that key references were properly qualified as printed publications under 35...more
A judge in the Northern District of California has enjoined a group of defendants from selling a laboratory DNA sequencing machine. The plaintiff first asserted the patent against one defendant in litigation in the District...more
FEDERAL CIRCUIT -
Federal Circuit Lacks Authority to Review Denial of Institution of IPR on Some, but Not All, Raised Grounds -
In an appeal of a decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) denying the...more
DISTRICT COURT CASES -
Attorney’s Fees Awarded Against Plaintiff for Inadequate Pre-Filing Investigation and Meritless Post-Discovery Positions -
A judge in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of...more
FEDERAL CIRCUIT CASES -
Federal Circuit Quashes $287 Million Enhanced Damages Award Finding Objectively Reasonable Defenses Raised During Litigation -
The Federal Circuit has reversed a district court’s award of...more
8/17/2015
/ America Invents Act ,
Appeals ,
Carnegie Mellon ,
Covered Business Method Proceedings ,
Damages ,
De Novo Standard of Review ,
Ford Motor ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Real Party in Interest ,
Standing ,
Willful Infringement
DISTRICT COURT CASES -
Humanized Antibody Not Found to Infringe Under DOE -
A district court judge granted UCB, Inc.’s (plaintiff) motion for summary judgment that its Cimzia® product, a humanized monoclonal...more