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
We have passed the midpoint of 2025, and the landscape of intellectual property law continues to evolve at a rapid pace, shaped by emerging technologies, and shifting judicial interpretations. From pivotal Supreme Court...more
Post-grant proceedings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) are undergoing sweeping transformation. Over the past year, as other federal agencies have grown cautious to avoid further budget constraints and downsizing,...more
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
In Global Health Solutions LLC v. Selner, the Federal Circuit addressed for the first time an appeal from a derivation proceeding litigated before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) under the America Invents Act (AIA)....more
The first half of 2025 has brought many changes at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”), including policy changes at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”). At the end of March 2025, the issuance of the...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
Etanercept 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
A Northern District of California judge recently granted a motion to reconsider his summary judgment ruling that defendant was barred from raising certain “device art” due to IPR estoppel under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2). In the...more
This Federal Circuit opinion analyzes various key issues in patent litigation, including the role of applicant admitted prior art (“AAPA”), standing, and obviousness. Background - Shockwave Medical, Inc. (“Shockwave”)...more
On July 24, 2025, the PTO Acting Director Coke Morgan Stewart discretionarily denied Amgen’s IPR2025-00601 and IPR2025-00602 challenging Bristol-Myers Squibb’s (“BMS”) U.S. Patent Nos. 9,856,320 (“the ’320 patent”) and...more
IGT v. Zynga Inc., Appeal No. 2023-2262 (Fed. Cir. July 22, 2025) In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit examined the reviewability and merits of the Patent Trial Appeal Board’s decision to institute inter...more
The PTAB has returned to a more flexible and discretionary approach to denying post-grant proceedings, reintroducing the Fintiv factors and adding new considerations such as settled expectations and USPTO workload. These...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 recent article, Haug Partners previewed that the impact of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) new bifurcated approach to discretionary denial requests would depend on how the new Acting USPTO Director, Coke...more
The acting director of the US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO) vacated and remanded a Patent Trial & Appeal Board decision to institute two inter partes review (IPR) petitions that challenged the same claims. The acting...more
AGILENT TECHNOLOGIES, INC. v. SYNTHEGO CORP. - Before Prost, Linn, and Reyna. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Obviousness does not require all claimed limitations to be expressly disclosed in a primary prior...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit partially reversed a decision by the Patent Trial & Appeal Board, effectively relaxing the nexus requirements for patent licenses pertaining to their usage as objective indicia...more
The acting director of the US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO) granted a patent owner’s request for discretionary denial and denied institution of an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding, finding that the petitioner engaged in...more
On June 18, 2025, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Acting Director Stewart issued a discretionary denial decision in Dabico Airport Solutions Inc. v. AXA Power ApS, granting the patent owner’s request for discretionary denial...more
On June 11, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decided Agilent Technologies, Inc. v. Synthego Corp. (No. 23-2186), addressing enablement of prior art references for disputed CRISPR-Cas9 gene-editing...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
Just three months ago, Acting Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Coke Morgan Stewart rescinded existing guidelines governing the Patent Trial and Appeal Board's (PTAB) discretion to deny petitions for...more
The US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) recently issued a Director Discretionary Denial decision expanding on the “settled expectations” ground for discretionary denial of a post-grant review proceeding...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
On June 6, 2025, the Acting Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”), Coke Morgan Stewart, issued a decision denying institution of five inter partes review (“IPR”) petitions filed by iRhythm, Inc....more