News & Analysis as of

Patent Trial and Appeal Board Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Patent Infringement

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

You Might Need a Lawyer if… the Judge Says you do: Judge Garnett Orders Case to be Dismissed for Failure to Secure Counsel

On March 11, 2025, District Judge Margaret M. Garnett dismissed SafeCast Limited’s (“SafeCast”) patent infringement lawsuit against Microsoft Corporation (“Microsoft”) because SafeCast failed to secure counsel. SafeCast Ltd....more

Proskauer Rose LLP

FTC Focus: What Access To Patent Settlements Would Mean

Proskauer Rose LLP on

The Federal Trade Commission has pursued aggressive and creative expansion of its antitrust enforcement efforts under the Biden administration, and the pharmaceutical industry is no exception. Indeed, in a recent interview,...more

Fish & Richardson

Five Tactics for Cybersecurity Companies to Defeat Patent Infringement Claims

Fish & Richardson on

Navigating patent infringement claims requires a deep understanding of both the legal landscape and the specifics of the technology at stake, especially in the fast-evolving cybersecurity sector. Creative litigation...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Service of Complaint Without Exhibits Does Not Trigger the One-Year Time Bar to File IPR

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board held that service of a bare complaint without exhibits did not trigger the one-year time bar under 35 U.S.C. § 315(b), which requires the filing of a petition for inter partes review within...more

Fox Rothschild LLP

Chief Judge Stark Denies Defendants’ Motions To Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaints Asserting Patent Infringement Due To The Use Of...

Fox Rothschild LLP on

By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Leonard P. Stark in Stragent, LLC v. BMW of North America, LLC et al., Civil Action No. 20-510-LPS (D.Del. March 25, 2021) (consolidated), the Court denied Defendants’ motions to...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

PTAB’s Denial of IPR Petition Forecloses Defendant’s Inequitable Conduct Claim in District Court

Relying heavily on the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s denial of an inter partes review (IPR) petition involving the patent-in-suit, a court in the Eastern District of Virginia recently refused to let the defendant amend its...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Intellectual Property Outlook: Cases and Trends to Follow in 2020 — Part 3

In this four-part series, we take a look forward at the cases, legislation, and other trends that are likely to have a significant impact on intellectual property law and practice in 2020. In the first two parts of the...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Got Served? The PTAB Must Figure It Out

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit addressed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB’s) role in determining proper service under 35 U.S.C. §315(b), and found that the PTAB correctly determined that the...more

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

PTAB Strategies and Insights - September 2019: PTAB Further Clarifies DJ Action Time Bar and Statutory Disclaimers

The PTAB designated at least three more decisions as precedential. Of note, two of the cases rely on the Federal Circuit’s en banc decision in Click to Call, which is scheduled for argument at the Supreme Court on December 9,...more

Jones Day

A Truism that Once Again Bears Repeating: Don’t Wait Until the Last Minute

Jones Day on

A recent decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) denying a petition for inter partes review serves as a stark reminder of the oft-repeated truism, “don’t wait until the last minute.” See VIZIO, Inc. v. ATI...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP - MoFo@ITC

UV Curable Coatings: No Exergen, but PTAB Decision Leads to Stricken Inequitable Conduct Defense

In a recent decision in UV Curable Coatings for Optical Fibers, Inv. No. 337-TA-1031, Judge MaryJoan McNamara struck a respondent’s inequitable conduct defense, which the respondent based on the complainants’ conduct during...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Declarant Must Be Made Available for Deposition in the United States - Square, Inc. v. REM Holdings 3, LLC

McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing the location of a deposition of patent owner’s declarant, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (PTO) Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) concluded that, absent an agreement between the parties to...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Divided PTAB Panel Denies Issue Joinder as a Matter of Law

McDermott Will & Emery on

Target Corp. v. Destination Maternity Corp. - Interpreting the statutory provision regarding the one-year time limitation and joinder of parties, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board...more

13 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