The US Supreme Court held in United States v. Arthrex that administrative patent judges’ ability to render final decisions on patentability on behalf of the Executive Branch is “incompatible with their status as inferior...more
6/21/2021
/ Administrative Patent Judges ,
Appointments Clause ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Director of the USPTO ,
Inferior Officers ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Principle Officers ,
SCOTUS ,
United States v Arthrex Inc ,
USPTO
On Wednesday, April 21, 2021, oral arguments will commence in Minerva Surgical, Inc. v. Hologic, Inc., and William H. Milliken, a director in Sterne Kessler’s Trial & Appellate Practice Group, will be live-tweeting updates...more
The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return on investment for all stakeholders looking at the entire...more
3/31/2021
/ § 315(b) ,
America Invents Act ,
Claims Limitations Period ,
Demand Letter ,
Denial of Institution ,
Due Process ,
Evidence ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Mandamus Petitions ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Invalidity ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Prior Art ,
USPTO ,
Willful Infringement
When oral arguments commence in United States v. Arthrex, Inc., No. 19-1434 (U.S.) on Monday, March 1, William H. Milliken, a director in Sterne Kessler’s Trial & Appellate Practice Group, will be live tweeting updates from...more
2/26/2021
/ 5 U.S.C. § 7513(a) ,
Administrative Patent Judges ,
Appointments Clause ,
Arthrex Inc v Smith & Nephew Inc ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Director of the USPTO ,
Inferior Officers ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Oral Argument ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Polaris Innovations Ltd v Kingston Technology Co ,
Principle Officers ,
SCOTUS ,
Severability Doctrine ,
Tenure ,
United States v Arthrex Inc
[co-author: Kathleen Wills]
Last year, the global COVID-19 pandemic created unprecedented challenges for American courts. By making several changes, however, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was able to...more
2/3/2021
/ Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA) ,
Adidas ,
Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) ,
Administrative Patent Judges ,
Administrative Proceedings ,
America Invents Act ,
Appeals ,
Appointments Clause ,
Certiorari ,
Claim Construction ,
Comcast ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Covenant Not to Sue ,
Denial of Certiorari ,
Dismissals ,
Due Process ,
Estoppel ,
Evidence ,
FanDuel ,
Final Written Decisions ,
Google ,
Hewlett-Packard ,
Hulu ,
Inter Partes Reexamination ,
International Trade Commission (ITC) ,
Judicial Review ,
Lack of Authority ,
Motion to Amend ,
Nike ,
Obviousness ,
Oral Argument ,
Patent Applications ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Invalidity ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Post-Grant Review ,
Precedential Opinion ,
Real Party in Interest ,
Section 337 ,
Subject Matter Jurisdiction ,
Thryv Inc v Click-To-Call Technologies LP ,
Time-Barred Claims ,
United States v Arthrex Inc ,
USPTO
In Nike, Inc. v. Adidas AG, No. 19-1262 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 9, 2020), the Federal Circuit offered important guidance to Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) litigants regarding how the notice requirements of the Administrative...more
4/29/2020
/ Adidas ,
Administrative Procedure Act ,
Appeals ,
Claim Amendments ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Motion to Amend ,
Nike ,
Notice Requirements ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Prior Art ,
Remand ,
Reversal ,
Vacated
The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return on investment for all stakeholders looking at the entire...more
In Thryv, Inc. v. Click-to-Call Technologies, LP the Supreme Court held, 7-2, that patent owners cannot appeal determinations by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) declining to apply the time-bar of 35 U.S.C. § 315(b)....more
4/21/2020
/ § 314(d) ,
§ 315(b) ,
§314(a) ,
§314(b) ,
America Invents Act ,
Appeals ,
Cuozzo Speed Technologies v Lee ,
Dissenting Opinions ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Judicial Review ,
Non-Appealable Decisions ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
SAS Institute Inc. v Iancu ,
SCOTUS ,
Thryv Inc v Click-To-Call Technologies LP ,
Time-Barred Claims ,
Vacated
Since the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s inception, it has faced questions regarding its constitutionality. This past year was no different. In 2019, aggrieved patent owners raised numerous constitutional challenges...more
3/28/2020
/ Administrative Patent Judges ,
Appeals ,
Appointments Clause ,
Article III ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Due Process ,
Fifth Amendment ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Oil States Energy Services v Greene's Energy Group ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Precedential Opinion ,
Severability Doctrine ,
Takings Clause
Powerful. Resilient. Ever-evolving. These characteristics of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) were on full display in 2019. This past year the PTAB received more than 1,300 inter partes review (IPR), post grant review...more
3/5/2020
/ Claim Construction ,
Concurrent Litigation ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Covered Business Method Proceedings ,
Design Patent ,
Estoppel ,
Evidentiary Standards ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Motion to Amend ,
Motion To Stay ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Post-Grant Review ,
Trial Practice Guidance
LSI and Ericsson petitioned for inter partes review (IPR) of several patents owned by the University of Minnesota (UMN). UMN moved to dismiss each IPR based on state sovereign immunity. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board...more
2/12/2020
/ Appeals ,
Article I ,
Article III ,
Denial of Certiorari ,
Ex Partes Reexamination ,
Final Written Decisions ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Motion to Dismiss ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Post-Grant Review ,
Prior Art ,
Sovereign Immunity ,
State Universities ,
Tribal Governments
Arthrex appealed a final written decision from an inter partes review (IPR) where the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) found all challenged claims of its patent anticipated. On appeal, Arthrex argued for the first time...more
2/12/2020
/ Administrative Hearings ,
Administrative Patent Judges ,
Appeals ,
Appointments Clause ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Fifth Amendment ,
Final Written Decisions ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Officers of the United States ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Remand ,
Removal At-Will ,
Retroactive Application ,
Secretary of Commerce ,
Severability Doctrine ,
Takings Clause ,
Vacated
In 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit docketed just over 650 appeals from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). That is the highest number since the Court started to hear post-American Invents Act...more
DuPont petitioned for inter partes review of Synvina’s patent, which was directed to a method of oxidizing a chemical using a specific temperature range, pressure range, catalyst, and solvent. The prior art disclosed the...more
3/26/2019
/ Appeals ,
Burden of Production ,
Burden-Shifting ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patent Validity ,
Patents ,
Prior Art ,
Reversal ,
Standard of Review
Smith & Nephew petitioned for inter partes review (IPR) of Arthrex’s patent. After the petition was filed, but before the Board issued an institution decision, Arthrex statutorily disclaimed all the challenged claims under 37...more
3/20/2019
/ Adverse Judgments ,
Appeals ,
Claim Disclaimer ,
Estoppel ,
Final Written Decisions ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Owner Preliminary Response ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Right To Appeal
In 2018, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit docketed close to 600 appeals from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). That is the second highest number since starting to hear post-American Invents Act...more
2/28/2019
/ § 315(b) ,
Adverse Judgments ,
Appeals ,
Article III ,
Assignor Estoppel ,
Burden of Proof ,
Burden-Shifting ,
Claim Construction ,
Collateral Estoppel ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Doctrine of Prosecution Disclaimer ,
Estoppel ,
Final Written Decisions ,
Injury-in-Fact ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Inventors ,
Non-Appealable Decisions ,
Non-Practicing Entities ,
Obviousness ,
Oil States Energy Services v Greene's Energy Group ,
Partial Institution ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Owner Preliminary Response ,
Patent Ownership ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Precedential Opinion ,
Printed Publications ,
Prior Art ,
Private Property ,
Public Rights Doctrine ,
Real Party in Interest ,
Right to a Jury ,
Right To Appeal ,
SAS Institute Inc. v Iancu ,
Section 101 ,
Section 102 ,
Section 103 ,
Seventh Amendment ,
Sovereign Immunity ,
Standing ,
Time-Barred Claims
In 2016, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit docketed more appeals from the US Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) than any other venue—a first in its over 30-year history. The post grant proceedings created by the...more
3/19/2018
/ § 315(b) ,
Administrative Procedure ,
Administrative Procedure Act ,
America Invents Act ,
Anticipation ,
Appeals ,
Broadest Reasonable Interpretation Standard ,
Burden of Persuasion ,
Burden of Proof ,
Claim Amendments ,
Claim Construction ,
Due Process ,
Ex Partes Reexamination ,
Expert Testimony ,
Final Written Decisions ,
Incorporation by Reference ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Judicial Review ,
Non-Appealable Decisions ,
Notice Requirements ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Invalidity ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patent Validity ,
Patents ,
Preponderance of the Evidence ,
Prior Art ,
Reaffirmation ,
Remand ,
Reversal ,
Substantial Evidence Standard ,
Vacated