Latest Publications

Share:

Withdrawal of Petitioner from IPR Proceeding All But Ensures Success in Contingent Motion to Amend

On remand from the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board granted patent owner’s motion to amend on the basis that the totality of the record did not demonstrate by a preponderance of the...more

PTAB: Informal Delivery of Complaint Does Not Start One-Year Clock for Filing IPR

A Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) panel has determined that emailing a proposed amended complaint is not “service of a complaint” under 35 U.S.C. § 315(b). On January 23, 2018, Aristocrat Technologies, Inc....more

Federal Circuit Refuses to Create Separate Exhaustion and Repair Rules for Design Patents

The Federal Circuit has ruled that neither the exhaustion nor permissible repair doctrines allow manufacture of new replacement components covered by design patents. The Automotive Body Parts Association (ABPA) sued Ford...more

PTAB Finds Good Cause for Staying Ex Parte Reexamination in Light of Parallel IPR

A panel at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) recently considered whether to stay an ex parte reexamination proceeding where the patent was also the subject of a parallel inter partes review (IPR). On September 11...more

PTAB Must Consider Privity and Real Party-in-Interest Relationships Arising After Filing but Before Institution for Time-Bar...

The Federal Circuit vacated a PTAB decision invalidating claims of U.S. Patent No. 6,212,079 (the “’079 Patent”) on the grounds that the inter partes review (IPR) petition was time-barred as a result of a merger between the...more

Nearly Identical Petitions Fail Under Both Post-Grant Review and Inter Partes Review Standards

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has denied a petitioner’s request for inter partes review (IPR) finding that petitioner failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of prevailing with respect to at least one...more

PTAB: Reexamination Does Not Reset the One-Year Deadline For Filing a Petition for Inter Partes Review

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board has denied a Petitioner’s request for institution of inter partes review (IPR) of claims that were added during ex parte reexamination because it found the IPR petitions were time-barred...more

Federal Circuit: Skepticism of FDA Supports Finding of Nonobviousness and Patent Eligibility Not Within Scope of Appeal of an IPR

The Federal Circuit has affirmed a decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board finding nonobvious the claims of U.S. Patent No. 7,772,209 (the “’209 Patent”), which are directed to a method of treating cancer. The claims...more

PTAB: Federal Circuit’s Click-to-Call Holding Applies to Statutory Bar Under 35 U.S.C. § 315(a)

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (the “Board”) vacated its institution decision and terminated an inter partes review (IPR) filed by Mylan Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Mylan”) based on Mylan’s prior counterclaim seeking a...more

Federal Circuit Holds that PTAB Applied “Too Rigid a Standard” In Determining Whether Inventor Was Diligent in Reducing Invention...

The Federal Circuit reversed an inter partes review (IPR) decision holding that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (the “Board”) incorrectly applied the standard for an inventor to prove diligence in reducing the invention to...more

Bar to File IPR Triggered by Declaratory Judgment Action, Even if Complaint Was Dismissed Without Prejudice

In Ruiz Food Products, Inc. v. MacroPoint LLC, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) considered whether the time-bar provision of 35 U.S.C. § 315(a)(1) was triggered when a real party-in-interest had previously filed an...more

PTAB Has Authority to Modify Initial Institution Decision in Light of SAS

In a recent final written decision, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has determined that it was not unlawful for it to modify its institution decision following the SAS Supreme Court case. In the PTAB proceeding,...more

Federal Circuit Decision Clarifies When an ANDA Filer May Appeal an Adverse IPR Ruling

In Amerigen Pharmaceuticals Limited v. UCB Pharma GmbH, generic drug manufacturer Amerigen appealed a decision of the Patent Trial & Appeal Board finding UCB’s patent to certain chemical derivatives of diphenylpropylamines...more

Estoppel Applies to “Known or Used” Prior Art if PTAB Considered Corresponding Written References

A district court in California has granted-in-part a Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment of no invalidity under 35 U.S.C. § 103 due to inter partes review (IPR) estoppel. During the pendency of the litigation, Defendants...more

PTAB Denies Motion to Excuse Late Filing of Exhibits to IPR Petition

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has denied a petitioner’s motion to excuse the late filing of the exhibits to its petition for inter partes review (IPR). The PTAB found that the petitioner had failed to show good...more

Evidence of Failed IPR Precluded When Validity No Longer at Issue

The Southern District of New York has granted a motion in limine precluding evidence of Defendant’s failed inter partes review (IPR) petition. The parties to the lawsuit are in the business of manufacturing and selling...more

Federal Circuit Clarifies Standard for Public Accessibility of Printed Publications; Offers Claim Drafting Tips

The Federal Circuit has affirmed the final written decisions of a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (the “Board”) panel in six related inter partes review (IPR) proceedings. The Board held in those proceedings that (1) a...more

PTAB Denies Request to Cross-Examine Experts Because Declarations Were Prepared for Other Proceedings and Were Not “Critical”...

In an ongoing inter partes review (IPR) proceeding, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (the “Board”) denied Petitioner Nestlé Healthcare Nutrition, Inc.’s request to cross examine two expert witnesses after Patent Owner...more

A Claimed Parameter Range That Overlaps with Ranges in the Prior Art Creates a Burden-Shifting and Rebuttable Presumption of...

The Federal Circuit has reversed a decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) that certain claims of U.S. Patent No. 8,865,921 (the “’921 Patent”) were not shown to be obvious, finding that the PTAB applied the...more

Federal Circuit Clarifies Burden of Proof on Challenges to Identification of Real Parties-in-Interest in IPR Proceedings

In Worlds Inc. v. Bungie, Inc., the Federal Circuit remanded an appeal from an inter partes review (“IPR”) instructing the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) to reweigh the evidence in a manner that placed the ultimate...more

Federal Circuit Dismisses IPR Petitioner’s Appeal of Final Written Decision for Lack of Standing

Earlier this month, the Federal Circuit dismissed for lack of standing an appeal filed by an inter partes review (IPR) petitioner of a final written decision issued by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) that held two...more

Lift of Stay Disallowed by District Court Post-SAS in View of PTAB’s Final Written Decision Lacking Non-Instituted Claims

The Delaware District Court issued an order on June 7, 2018 denying a party’s motion to lift a stay following the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) final written decision in a parallel inter partes review (IPR)...more

PTAB Grants Limited Alternative to Overbroad and Delayed Additional Discovery Requests in IPR

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) granted-in-part Patent Owner Twilio Inc.’s motion for additional discovery pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.51(b)(2). Though the “Patent Owner delayed in seeking the requested discovery”...more

Corporate Defendant in Patent Infringement Suit Does Not Necessarily Reside in All of the Judicial Districts in a State with...

The Federal Circuit ruled that when a defendant is incorporated in a state that has multiple judicial districts, the defendant will reside in only one of the districts for venue purposes under the patent venue statute, 28...more

References Introduced During IPR Proceeding Not Necessarily New Evidence to Which Patent Owner Had No Opportunity to Respond

On May 14, 2018, the Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (the “Board”) Final Written Decision in an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding holding all claims of Anacor Pharmaceuticals, Inc.’s (“Anacor”)...more

209 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 9

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide