News & Analysis as of

Discovery Patent Litigation Evidence

Jones Day

Orders to Preserve Evidence (“Saisies”) at the Unified Patent Court: Two-Year Roundup and Early Insights

Jones Day on

Evidence is a key battleground in virtually all patent litigation cases. As a Court designed to combine the best and most efficient features of the main EU national patent litigation systems, the Unified Patent Court (“UPC”)...more

Knobbe Martens

Inaction Can Lead To Argument Forfeiture on Appeal

Knobbe Martens on

ALIVECOR, INC. v. APPLE INC. Before Hughes, Linn, and Stark. Appeal from Patent Trial and Appeal Board - A party in a PTAB proceeding forfeits the ability to challenge an opposing party’s discovery obligation violation...more

A&O Shearman

Poster Presentation Tied To Business Objectives Serves As Evidence Of Infringement Of Patented Methods

A&O Shearman on

On February 12, 2025, the United States District Court for the District of Delaware denied defendant Parse Biosciences’s (“Parse”) motions for summary judgment that: (i) Parse had never actually conducted any direct or...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

PTAB Year in Review – Caveat Experimenter: Using Experimental Data in PTAB Proceedings Comes With Risks

Parties involved in Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) proceedings sometimes contemplate submitting experimental data to support their positions. Although such data can be useful, there also are risks. Several recent cases...more

Jones Day

Speculative IPR Discovery Request Not in the Interest of Justice

Jones Day on

“Because Congress intended inter partes reviews to serve as a faster and more cost-effective alternative to litigating validity in district courts, discovery in inter partes reviews is limited.” See Garmin Int’l, Inc. v....more

Knobbe Martens

New Trial Granted Because “Nearly All” of the Defendant’s Noninfringement Evidence Was Untimely

Knobbe Martens on

The district court erred by admitting untimely expert testimony on noninfringement and by refusing to grant a new trial after the jury found noninfringement. Trudell Medical International (“Trudell”) sued D R Burton...more

McDermott Will & Schulte

Judicial Bias and Erroneous Admission of Expert Testimony Prompt Case Reassignment

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a district court’s decision to admit expert testimony and remanded the case to a different judge, noting that “from the moment this case fell in his lap, the trial...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

District Court: Knowledge of Infringement Cannot be Inferred From Non-Production of Opinion of Counsel Letter

The District of Delaware recently rejected a patentee’s argument that non-production of an opinion letter from counsel, combined with knowledge of the patent, warranted a finding that defendant induced infringement. ...more

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

There’s an Exception to Every Rule: Judge Schofield Finds a Comparison of the Plaintiff’s Patented System and the Accused System...

In a recently published opinion, Judge Lorna G. Schofield (S.D.N.Y.) found that it was appropriate to compare the accused system to a plaintiff’s commercial system embodying the asserted patent claims, rather than the patent...more

Kilpatrick

5 Key Takeaways | Building a Winning Evidentiary Record at the PTAB (and Surviving Appeal)

Kilpatrick on

Kilpatrick partners John Alemanni and Justin Krieger recently presented a CLE addressing “Building a Winning Evidentiary Record at the PTAB (and Surviving Appeal).”...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

PTAB Denies Motion to Compel Discovery of Evidence from Parallel ITC Investigation Due to Lack of Inconsistency

The PTAB denied a petitioner’s motion to compel routine discovery that sought information from a parallel ITC investigation for alleged inconsistent positions taken by patent owner in the IPR. The board found that patent...more

Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.

Sued: What In-house Counsel Without Litigation Experience Need to Know - Preparing Your Inside Team

3: Preparing Your Inside Team - Preservation, Privilege, Potential Pitfalls -This is the third in a series of articles that explores considerations and suggested actions for in-house counsel who are inexperienced in patent...more

Haug Partners LLP

Foresight in Patent Litigation: How Adherence to Local Rules Can Make or Break a Case

Haug Partners LLP on

On September 7, 2022, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a precedential opinion in Arendi S.A.R.L v. LG Electronics, Inc., offering an important reminder to patent litigators of the necessity of following the...more

Jones Day

Discovery Request Seeking Deposition Preparation Materials Denied

Jones Day on

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) recently denied a Motion for Additional Discovery because the movant could not prove beyond mere speculation that the requested documents would be useful to show witness scripting....more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Unavailability of Witness for Cross-Examination Dooms Reliance on Affidavit Testimony in PTAB Proceeding

In a series of related inter partes review proceedings, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board recently granted a petitioner’s motion to strike the sworn affidavit of a witness who was unwilling to submit to cross-examination. In...more

Goodwin

Issue 34: PTAB Trial Tracker

Goodwin on

The availability of post-grant proceedings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has changed the face of patent litigation. This monthly digest is designed to keep you up-to-date by highlighting interesting PTAB,...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

Patent Owner Tip #2 for Surviving An Instituted IPR: Don’t Swing for the Fences in IPR Depositions

As discussed in our previous post, one of the most critical tasks for Patent Owners during the Inter Partes Reviews (“IPR”) discovery period is deposing the Petitioner’s expert. Since IPR depositions are treated differently...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

CVC Files Reply to Broad's Opposition to CVC's Miscellaneous Motion No. 6; Board Issues Orders

Motion practice continues in Interference No. 106,115 between Senior Party The Broad Institute, Harvard University, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (collectively, "Broad") and Junior Party the University of...more

McDermott Will & Schulte

PTAB: Lawyers Permitted to Confer with Witnesses to Prepare Redirect

Addressing the scope of Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) guidelines that prohibit lawyers from conferring with their witness during cross-examination, the PTAB designated as precedential a 2014 decision permitting lawyers...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

International Trade Commission ALJ Holds that Relying on Pre-Suit Testing Waives Privilege Protection

A recent order from International Trade Commission Administrative Law Judge Elliott provides helpful guidance regarding a common ITC discovery dispute: whether a party may withhold from discovery as work product pre-suit test...more

Jones Day

Precedential PTAB Order Addresses Witness Examination

Jones Day on

The PTAB panel in Focal Therapeutics, Inc. v. SenoRx, Inc., Case IPR2014-00116 (PTAB July 21, 2014) (Paper 19), provided certain clarifications with regard to the ability to confer with witnesses during examination. This...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

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

Orrick - Trade Secrets Group

In The Ninth Circuit, Your Fate (And Documents) May Not Be Sealed

Judge Vince Chhabria of the Northern District of California handed down a strongly worded order denying a motion to seal alleged trade secret information, and sanctioning counsel for defendant for the frivolous request. ...more

Jones Day

No Genuine Issue of Fact Where Petitioner’s Claim Construction Is Wrong

Jones Day on

The PTAB’s recent decision denying rehearing in United Microelectronics Corp. v. Lone Star Silicon Innovations LLC, IPR2017-01513, Paper 10 (PTAB May 22, 2018) sheds light on the Board’s practice under 37 C.F.R. 42.108(c),...more

Jones Day

Additional Discovery: Must Be More Than Mere Possibility

Jones Day on

The PTAB recently denied a motion for additional discovery that sought the production of documents argued to be relevant to inventorship. In Watson Laboratories, Inc. v. United Therapeutics, Corp., Case IPR2017-01621 and...more

31 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

"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