In a recent decision issued in Louisiana-Pacific Corp. v. Huber Engineered Woods LLC, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board addressed the showing that a petitioner for inter partes review must make to demonstrate that an asserted...more
Relying heavily on the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s denial of an inter partes review (IPR) petition involving the patent-in-suit, a court in the Eastern District of Virginia recently refused to let the defendant amend its...more
A federal judge in the Northern District of California recently rejected an argument that would have expanded inter partes review (IPR) estoppel seemingly beyond the plain reading of 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2). The plaintiff had...more
In Valeo North America, Inc. v. Schaeffler Tech. AG & CO. KG, after finding that all original claims of the patent were unpatentable during an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board granted,...more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has issued a final written decision determining that the Coalition for Affordable Drugs VIII, LLC (“Coalition” or “Petitioner”) failed to demonstrate that claims 1-10 of U.S. Patent...more
4/3/2017
/ Commercial Success ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Nexus ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Pharmaceutical Patents ,
Preponderance of the Evidence ,
Printed Publications ,
Prior Art ,
Universities
SUPREME COURT CASES -
Sequenom Seeks Supreme Court Review of Diagnostic Claims Held Invalid Under § 101 -
On Monday, March 21, 2016, Sequenom, Inc. filed a petition for writ of certiorari in Sequenom, Inc. v. Ariosa...more