News & Analysis as of

Patent Trial and Appeal Board Apple America Invents Act

Holland & Knight LLP

Rescission of the Fintiv Guidance Memorandum, and What Comes Next

Holland & Knight LLP on

The U.S. Patent and Trade Office (PTO) on February 28, 2025, rescinded former PTO Director Kathi Vidal's June 21, 2022, memorandum (Memorandum) addressing discretionary denial of inter partes review (IPR) of patents that are...more

WilmerHale

PTAB/USPTO Update - March 2025

WilmerHale on

On February 24, 2025 the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) announced that David Gooder would step down from his role as Commissioner for Trademarks at the end of the month....more

Fish & Richardson

USPTO Rescinds 2022 Guidance on Discretionary Denials

Fish & Richardson on

On February 28, 2025, the United States Patent and Trademark Office announced that it has rescinded the June 21, 2022, memorandum about discretionary denials in Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) post-grant proceedings with...more

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

2023 PTAB Year in Review: Analysis & Trends: Federal Circuit Cases Exploring a Year of Rules, Rulemaking, and Rule Enforcement at...

A trio of cases this past year illustrate a trend of increasing importance in the power of Patent-Office rulemaking and enforcement, and the influence it has on patent owners and challengers alike....more

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

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2022 Decisions

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

Fish & Richardson

Director Vidal Issues Interim Guidance on Discretionary Denials under Fintiv

Fish & Richardson on

Earlier today, USPTO Director Kathi Vidal issued interim guidance regarding the application of the factors the PTAB considers in determining whether to institute an AIA post-grant proceeding where there is parallel district...more

McDermott Will & Emery

No More Bites at the Apple: Imminent and Non-Speculative Standing Still Required

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reiterated that a patent challenger did not have Article III appellate standing to obtain review of a final Patent Trial & Appeal Board (PTAB) ruling because the underlying...more

Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer

United States Calls for Supreme Court to Deny Petition for Certiorari Challenging Fintiv Factors

On Oct. 28, 2021, the Solicitor General filed a brief in opposition to Apple’s petition for a writ of certiorari in Apple Inc. v. Optis Cellular Tech., LLC et al. (No. 21-118). The government argued that the Federal Circuit...more

Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C.

Silicon Valley Challenges the PTAB’s NHK-Fintiv Rule: Can IPRs Be Denied Based on Non-Statutory Factors?

Last week, four major technology companies – Apple, Cisco, Google, and Intel – brought suit against the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”), challenging its authority to reject petitions for inter...more

Kilpatrick

Fallout from the Fintiv Precedential Decision

Kilpatrick on

On May 5th, the Board designated an order regarding discretionary denial precedential. Apple v. Fintiv, Inc, IPR2020-00019, Paper 11 (P.T.A.B. Mar. 20, 2020) (precedential). In the two months since that designation, more than...more

McDermott Will & Emery

No Disclaimer, No Problem – Terms Limited by Consistent Statements

In an appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found claim construction error and reversed the PTAB’s finding that all instituted claims were unpatentable....more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - February 2020 #2

PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Samsung Electronics America, Inc. v. Prisua Engineering Corp., Appeal No. 2019-1169, -1260 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 4, 2020) - Our case of the week concerns issues particular to inter partes review...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Patent Owner Statements in IPR May Result in Prosecution Disclaimer

Addressing for the first time the issue of whether statements made during America Invents Act post-grant proceedings can trigger a prosecution disclaimer, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld the district...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Fresh From the Bench: Precedential Patent Cases From the Federal Circuit

Our report includes discussions of six of the precedential cases decided in the past week and will include the other three cases in next week’s report. In Aylus v. Apple, the panel finds prosecution disclaimer in a...more

McDermott Will & Emery

En Banc Federal Circuit to Consider AIA Appeals Based on Time Bar Provision

McDermott Will & Emery on

In a September 2015 panel decision, Achates Reference Publishing v. Apple, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled that under 35 USC 314(b), decisions of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) finding that an...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

IP Cases to Watch in 2017

The New Year brings excitement and anticipation of changes for the best. Some of the pending patent cases provide us with ample opportunity to expect something new and, if not always very desirable to everybody, at least...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

VirnetX Faces Follow-on IPR Petition from a Different Petitioner After Settling Previously Instituted IPR

Foley & Lardner LLP on

In IPR2014-00614, Microsoft filed a petition for IPR against US Patent No. 7,418,504 (“the ‘504 patent) owned by VirnetX, which was instituted based upon anticipation grounds over Kiuchi (see institution decision). This IPR...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Achates Reference Publishing, Inc. v. Apple Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2015)

Earlier this week, in the Achates Reference Publishing, Inc. v. Apple Inc. case, the Federal Circuit reaffirmed the holding in In re Cuozzo Speed Techs., LLC that it could not review any decision by the Patent Trial and...more

Perkins Coie

Inter Partes Review Proceedings: A Third Anniversary Report

Perkins Coie on

When inter partes review (IPR) proceedings became effective in September 2012, few people would have predicted the transformative effect it would have on patents and the litigation landscape. Three years in, IPR has become...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review | June 2015

Knobbe Martens on

Accused Infringer’s Good-Faith Belief In Invalidity No Defense To Induced Infringement - In Commil USA, LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc., No. 13-896, the Supreme Court held a good-faith belief a patent is invalid is not a...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Technological Invention Exception Key to Foiling CBM - Bloomberg Finance LP v. Quest Licensing Corporation; Apple Inc. v....

In four orders addressing the requirements for instituting a covered business method (CBM) review, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)) found the “financial product or service”...more

21 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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