Understanding the Impact of IPR Estoppel and PTAB Discretionary Denials — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Navigating PTAB’s New Approach to IPR and PGR Discretionary Denial - Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
5 Key Takeaways | Building a Winning Evidentiary Record at the PTAB (and Surviving Appeal)
Director Review Under the USPTO's Final Rule – Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Patent Considerations in View of the Nearshoring Trends to the Americas
4 Key Takeaways | Updates in Standard Essential Patent Licensing and Litigation
Behaving Badly: OpenSky v. VLSI and Sanctions at the PTAB — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Scott McKeown Discusses PTAB Trends and Growth of Wolf Greenfield’s Washington, DC Office
Wolf Greenfield Attorneys Preview What’s Ahead in 2024
USPTO Director Review — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
5 Key Takeaways | PTAB Update: The Waning Impact of Fintiv on Discretionary Denials
3 Key Takeaways | Third party Prior Art Submissions at USPTO
Discretionary Denials at the PTAB: What to Expect? - Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Secondary Considerations of Non-Obviousness - Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
JONES DAY TALKS®: Supreme Court Rules on Constitutionality of Administrative Patent Judges
Five Impactful USPTO Procedural Developments for Patent Practitioners
Jones Day Talks®: Patent Litigation, PTAB, Iancu's Legacy, and Institution Discretion
The Briefing: COVID 19 Bill Stimulates the Economy and Changes in the Intellectual Property Law
[IP Hot Topics Podcast] Innovation Conversations: Andrei Iancu
Fallout from the Fintiv Precedential Decision
Sterne Kessler’s U.S. IP Update is a newsletter delivering the latest developments in U.S. intellectual property law, tailored for companies and legal counsel in Korea. Stay informed on key court decisions, policy changes,...more
Welcome to the Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter, our review of decisions and trends in the intellectual property arena. In this edition, we learn that duping the court can prove costly, excluding a witness may...more
On July 18, 2025, Scott R. Boalick, Chief Administrative Patent Judge for the Patent Trials and Appeals Board (“PTAB”), announced that, absent good cause, the PTAB will issue a Notice of Filing Date Accorded within 14 days...more
Under a new U.S. Patent and Trademark Office ("USPTO") policy issued in March 2025, pre-institution inter partes review ("IPR") proceedings are now bifurcated, consisting of a first phase in which the director considers...more
In a startling development, Acting Director of the USPTO Coke Morgan Stewart has denied institution of an inter partes review (IPR) on the basis of “settled expectations,” on the sole ground that the subject patent had been...more
Since the US Patent & Trademark Office’s (PTO) decision to rescind former Director Vidal’s memo on procedures for post-grant proceedings where there is parallel district court litigation, Current Acting Director Coke Morgan...more
On May 12, 2025, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated-in-part and remanded a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) decision in an interference proceeding concluding that the Broad Institute, Inc. (“Broad...more
Key Takeaways: Federal Circuit Reopens CRISPR-Cas9 Priority Fight. The CAFC vacated the PTAB’s earlier ruling that UC lacked prior conception of CRISPR-Cas9 in eukaryotic cells, remanding the interference for reconsideration...more
Those hoping the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit would finally resolve priority in the long-pending dispute between the University of California and the Broad Institute will have to wait a little longer. Oral...more
Recently, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“the Board”) was persuaded to consider the merits of three out of seven concurrent petitions for an inter partes review of a single patent due to the patent’s complicated claiming...more
Recentive Analytics, Inc. v. Fox Corp., et al., No. 2023-2437 (Fed. Cir. (D. Del.) Apr. 18, 2025). Opinion by Dyk, joined by Prost and Goldberg (sitting by designation). Recentive sued Fox for infringing four patents that...more
It is relatively uncommon for parties to submit expert declarations in the preliminary-response phase of an IPR proceeding, but recently the Patent Owner in Imperative Care, Inc. v. Inari Medical, Inc. effectively used that...more
A recent Patent Trial and Appeal Board decision related to hybrid quantum computing paves the way for more quantum computing-related patents, and potential litigation....more
AliveCor, Inc. v. Apple, Inc., No. 23-1512 (Fed. Cir. 2025) – On March 7, 2025, the Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s inter partes review (“IPR”) decisions invalidating all claims of three AliveCor...more
A new interim process for the acting director to exercise discretion as to whether to institute an inter partes review ("IPR") or a post-grant review ("PGR") was announced on March 26, 2025, in which discretionary...more
In the mid-2000s, the U.S. Patent Office (USPTO) determined that reexaminations would be more consistent and legally correct if performed by a centralized set of experienced and specially trained Examiners. As a result, the...more
On March 13, 2025, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal Circuit) issued a decision titled In Re: Xencor, Inc. (the Xencor decision). The Xencor decision affirms the decision of the Appeals Review Panel...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded a Patent Trial & Appeal Board patentability determination, finding that the Board failed to consider the entire record regarding the prior art status of a...more
Despite its potential to transform the global economy and impact national security, quantum computing has advanced largely outside public scrutiny. Artificial intelligence has dominated public discourse, while quantum...more
CQV CO., LTD. v. MERCK PATENT GMBH - Before Cunningham, Chen, and Mayer. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The Board erred by failing to explain why it discarded material and unrebutted evidence that a reference...more
CQV Co., Ltd. v. Merck Patent GmbH, No. 2023-1027 (Fed. Cir. (PTAB) Mar. 10, 2025). Opinion by Cunningham, joined by Chen and Mayer. CQV petitioned the Patent Trial and Appeal Board for post-grant review of a Merck patent...more
In Kroy IP Holdings, LLC v. Groupon, Inc., 127 F.4th 1376 (Fed. Cir. 2025), the Federal Circuit held that patentees in district court are not collaterally estopped from asserting claims that were not immaterially different...more
Takeaways - - Expired patents may be eligible for reexamination. - Owner’s options during reexamination of an expired patent are severely limited. Similar to reexamination practice, which has long allowed reexamination...more
Adalimumab Challenged Claim Types in IPR and Litigation: Claims include those challenged in litigations and IPRs. Claims are counted in each litigation and IPR, so claims from the same patent challenged in multiple...more
Rituximab Challenged Claim Types in IPR and Litigation: Claims include those challenged in litigations and IPRs. Claims are counted in each litigation and IPR, so claims from the same patent challenged in multiple...more