Fallout from the Fintiv Precedential Decision
JONES DAY TALKS®: Appointments of PTAB Judges Ruled Unconstitutional ... What Now?
On February 28, 2025, the United States Patent and Trademark Office announced that it has rescinded the June 21, 2022, memorandum about discretionary denials in Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) post-grant proceedings with...more
After an inter partes review finds certain claims of a patent unpatentable, may the patentee assert other claims, immaterially different, in district court without being collaterally estopped? This was the question presented...more
Roku, Inc. v. Universal Electronics, Inc., Appeal No. 2022-1058 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 31, 2023) In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit affirmed the U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB’s) final written...more
Last year, in our inaugural issue of “The Year in Review,” we reported that since the landmark jury verdict in the IP litigation between Apple and Samsung in 2012, which awarded more than $1B to Apple for infringement of...more
After finding that Apple infringed certain AliveCor patents related to wearable devices capable of monitoring a user’s cardiac activity, the International Trade Commission (“ITC”) entered a limited exclusion order and a cease...more
As part of the recovery from the global COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit took steps to return to normal operations. It began requiring live oral arguments in August 2022 and, by November,...more
In conjunction with the release of the firm's year-in-review report, speakers will offer case summaries and analysis of the significant 2022 appellate rulings discussed in the report. Topics of the featured intellectual...more
Inter partes review (IPR) proceedings raise complex estoppel issues that courts are grappling with and patent litigants must consider. Because patent challengers can assert invalidity in three different tribunals (the...more
[co-author: Jamie Dohopolski] Love it or hate it, ignore the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) at your peril. The introduction of the PTAB as part of the America Invents Act over ten years ago has forever changed...more
Intel Corp. petitioned for six inter partes reviews (IPRs) challenging the validity of U.S. Patent No. 9,608,675, a patent directed to power management in wireless devices. In each proceeding, Intel and patent-owner Qualcomm...more
This year, we will mark the 10-year anniversary of the first jury verdict in the landmark IP litigation between Apple and Samsung, which resulted in the jury awarding more than $1B to Apple. More than $500M of that award was...more
[co-author: Jamie Dohopolski] Last year, the continued global COVID-19 pandemic forced American courts to largely continue the procedures set in place in 2020. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was no...more
We have seen that decisions to institute an inter partes review (IPR) when the challenged patent is part of a parallel proceeding have become rare recently in light of the Fintiv factors. Apple Inc. v. Fintiv, Inc.,...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
[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
The authors propose replacing the PTAB’s current NHK-Fintiv factors with the alternative “Babcock-Train Factors” set forth herein These alternative factors have been crafted in an effort to provide clearer institution...more
The United States District Court for the Central District of California recently denied Defendant Adobe Systems Inc.’s motion to stay litigation pending resolution of parallel inter partes review (“IPR”) proceedings before...more
In an Initial Determination finding that Fujifilm violated Section 337 by infringing two patents held by Sony, ALJ Cheney found another patent invalid after ruling that inter partes review (“IPR”) estoppel does not apply to...more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) issued Final Written Decisions regarding Cisco’s U.S. Patent Nos. 6,377,577 (the “’577 Patent”) and 7,023,853 (the “’853 Patent”) on May 25, 2017 and U.S. Patent No. 7,224,668 (the...more