The PTAB and District Courts do not always see eye to eye when it comes to prior art. On August 21, 2020, the Board issued a trio of final written decisions refusing to invalidate the claims of three patents, two of which...more
On September 6, 2019, a PTAB panel including USPTO Director Andrei Iancu instituted inter partes review (“IPR”) of U.S. Patent No. 9,279,259 (“the ‘259 Patent”). The ‘259 Patent is directed to a tile lippage removal system...more
On March 21, 2018 the PTAB issued a press release announcing that two decisions denying review under 35 U.S.C. § 325(d) are designated as informative:
Kayak Software Corp.v. International Business Machines Corp.,...more
4/5/2018
/ Claim Construction ,
Evidence ,
Final Written Decisions ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Examinations ,
Patent Prosecution ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Prior Art ,
Prosecution History Estoppel ,
Section 325(d)
Patent applicants often draft claims to cover various ranges of physical or chemical characteristics. Of primary concern during prosecution are prior art documents that disclose similar, but not overlapping, ranges. In In re...more