As a patent owner involved in patent litigation, you must consider numerous factors when negotiating a settlement agreement. An important contemplation is timing, because finalizing a settlement agreement at the wrong...more
The Federal Circuit recently determined that it lacked jurisdiction to review the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s determination that assignor estoppel has no affect in an inter partes review (“IPR”). The majority’s decision...more
10/3/2016
/ Assignor Estoppel ,
CAFC ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Cuozzo Speed Technologies ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Patent Invalidity ,
Patent Ownership ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patent Validity ,
Patents ,
Versata
On March 23, 2016, the Federal Circuit in MAG Aerospace Indus., Inc. v. B/E Aerospace, Inc., Nos. 2015-1370, -1426, upheld a decision concerning U.S. patents directed to vacuum toilets found on commercial aircraft. In its...more
Following the filing of a petition with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) seeking to initiate either an Inter Partes Review (IPR) or Covered Business Method (CBM) Review, the patent owner may file a preliminary...more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board recently designated as precedential its decision in Westlake Services, LLC v. Credit Acceptance Corp., CBM2014-00176, Paper 28 (PTAB May 14, 2015) addressing the scope of estoppel under 35...more
Last week, the PTAB designated two recent post-grant proceeding decisions as “precedential,” marking only the second and third time it has designated one of its opinions as binding on all PTAB judges. One of those...more
In Ethicon Endo-Surgery, Inc. v. Covidien LP, a 2-1 panel split of the Federal Circuit held that neither the American Invents Act (“AIA”) nor the Constitution precludes the same panel of the Patent Trial & Appeal Board...more
1/18/2016
/ Administrative Appeals ,
Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) ,
America Invents Act ,
Covidien ,
Due Process ,
Ethicon ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patent-Eligible Subject Matter ,
Patents ,
Split of Authority ,
USPTO
Mintz Levin has won extraordinary relief for its client, Straight Path IP Group, Inc., convincing the Federal Circuit to completely reverse and remand an IPR final written decision adverse to a patent owner for the first...more
Mintz Levin has won extraordinary relief for its client, Straight Path IP Group, Inc., convincing the Federal Circuit to completely reverse and remand an IPR final written decision adverse to a patent owner for the first...more
Last week, the Federal Circuit explained that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board did not err when it allowed a petitioner to revise its Inter Partes Review Reply brief after first cautioning the petitioner that the PTAB may...more
The Federal Circuit has again held that it lacks jurisdiction to review certain decisions of the U.S. Patent Trial & Appeal Board in Inter Partes Reviews, continuing the Court’s apparent “hands off” approach to reviewing PTAB...more
10/9/2015
/ Apple ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Covered Business Method Proceedings ,
En Banc Review ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Jurisdiction ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Invalidity ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Petition For Rehearing ,
Real Party in Interest ,
Versata ,
Young Lawyers
Earlier this week, the Federal Circuit in Circuit Check Inc. v. QXQ, Inc. clarified the standard by which a reference may be considered prior art for the purposes of an obviousness determination. See No. 2015-1155, Slip. Op....more