News & Analysis as of

Patent Trial and Appeal Board Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding Patent Litigation

Morgan Lewis

USPTO Tightens Limits on AAPA Use in IPRs Following Qualcomm Precedent

Morgan Lewis on

A recent memo from the acting director of the US Patent and Trademark Office directs the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) to reject inter partes review (IPR) petitions that use “applicant admitted prior art (AAPA), expert...more

Jones Day

Acting Director Reverses Previous Discretionary Denial

Jones Day on

For the first time under the bifurcated institution procedures, the Acting Director reversed her own prior discretionary denial, citing changed circumstances based on a settlement in the parallel district court litigation. ...more

McCarter & English, LLP

Navigating the Landscape of Patent Challenges at the USPTO

Challengers striving to beat higher-ranked opponents at the US Open tennis tournament happening now in New York are not the only challengers facing tricky new situations. Parties wishing to challenge the validity of US...more

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

U.S. IP Update – August 2025

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

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

Federal Circuit Issues First Decision on Litigated AIA Derivation Proceeding

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

Jones Day

Institution Denied Based on Parallel Proceeding and Prior Denial

Jones Day on

On December 6, 2024, Comcast Cable Communications, LLC (“Comcast”) filed three separate petitions for inter partes review (“IPR”) of U.S. Patent No. 9,866,438 (“the ’438 Patent”), which is assigned to Entropic Communications,...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

DexCom, Inc. v. Stewart (Fed. Cir. 2025)

The Federal Circuit affirmed a decision by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) in an inter partes review prompted by an infringement allegation in DexCom, Inc. v....more

Goodwin

UK Court of Appeal Upholds Moderna mRNA Patent Against Pfizer/BioNTech

Goodwin on

On August 1, 2025, a UK Court of Appeal upheld the validity of Moderna’s European Patent No. 3,590,949 (“EP’949”) in a dispute with Pfizer and BioNTech. The decision affirmed a July 2024 UK High Court ruling finding that...more

Knobbe Martens

No Shenanigans: IPRs and Interference Estoppel

Knobbe Martens on

IGT v. ZYNGA INC. - Before Prost, Reyna, and Taranto. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). Interference estoppel does not apply when the interference was terminated due to a threshold issue....more

Fenwick & West LLP

Navigating the PTAB’s New Discretionary Denial Landscape: Strategic Shifts for Patent Challenges

Fenwick & West LLP on

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has undergone significant changes in how it evaluates patent challenges, creating both opportunities and obstacles for technology and life sciences companies....more

Robins Kaplan LLP

New ANDA Cases Second Quarter 2025

Robins Kaplan LLP on

This chart summarizes the case name, presiding judge, drug, and patents-at-issue in all federal district court cases that are filed pursuant to the Hatch-Waxman Act. It also includes the same information for proceedings...more

McDermott Will & Schulte

Collateral estoppel remains inapplicable to unchallenged IPR claims

Returning to its decision in Kroy IP, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied a petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc, leaving undisturbed its prior opinion that collateral estoppel does not apply...more

McCarter & English, LLP

New Patent Office Guidance Raises Bar for IPR Petitioners

The Patent Office recently announced that it will begin enforcing a rule that requires that inter partes review (IPR) petitions “specify where each element of the claim is found in the prior art patents or printed...more

Venable LLP

Spotlight On: Neulasta® (pegfilgrastim) / Fulphila® (pegfilgrastim-jmdb) / Udenyca® (pegfilgrastim-cbqv) / Ziextenzo®...

Venable LLP on

Pegfilgrastim 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

Jones Day

Two Week Deadline for PTAB to Issue Notice of Filing Date Accorded

Jones Day on

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

Venable LLP

Spotlight On: Actemra® (tocilizumab) / Tofidence™ (tocilizumab-bavi) / Tyenne® (tocilizumab-aazg) / Avtozma® (tocilizumab-anoh) -...

Venable LLP on

Tocilizumab Challenged Claim Types in IPRs: Claims are counted in each IPR, so claims from the same patent challenged in multiple IPRs are counted more than once. Within each IPR, claims are counted only once, whether they...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

IPR Discretionary Denial Rates at the PTAB: The New Normal

Inter partes review (IPR) proceedings are a cost-effective way by which patent challengers can dispute the validity of an issued patent. To institute an IPR, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) must determine that the...more

Venable LLP

Spotlight On: Enbrel® (etanercept) / Erelzi® (etanercept-szzs) / Eticovo® (etanercept-ykro) - August 2025

Venable LLP on

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

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

American Science and Engineering, Inc. v. Stewart (Fed. Cir. 2025)

Under Dickinson v. Zurko courts (specifically, the Federal Circuit) should defer to factual determinations by administrative agencies like the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office unless they are not supported by substantial...more

A&O Shearman

Federal Circuit Issues Key Ruling On Collateral Estoppel And Patent Invalidity

A&O Shearman on

The Federal Circuit recently issued a decision in the ongoing dispute in Kroy IP Holdings, LLC v. Groupon, Inc., addressing the collateral estoppel effect of Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decisions on subsequent...more

Venable LLP

Spotlight On: Lantus® / Lantus® SoloSTAR® (insulin glargine recombinant) / Basaglar® (insulin glargine) / Semglee® (insulin...

Venable LLP on

Insulin Glargine 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

Venable LLP

Spotlight On: Humira® (adalimumab) / Amjevita™ (adalimumab-atto) / Cyltezo® (adalimumab-adbm) / Hyrimoz™ (adalimumab-adaz) /...

Venable LLP on

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

Kilpatrick

The PTAB’s Discretionary Denial Crackdown: Strategy, Stats, and Survival Tips

Kilpatrick on

Back in March, I wrote about Acting Director Coke Morgan Stewart’s overhaul of the pre-institution discretionary denial process. Since then, much has been written on the topic and, for better or worse, the dust has started to...more

Jones Day

Subsequent Challenge Does Not Justify Discretionary Denial

Jones Day on

In a recent decision, Acting Director Coke Morgan Stewart denied a Patent Owner’s request for discretionary denial in LifeVac, LLC v. DCSTAR, Inc., IPR2025-00454. Even though Petitioner had previously challenged the same...more

Jones Day

Acting Director Clarifies Multi-Petition Policy for Competing Constructions

Jones Day on

On June 25, 2025, Acting Director Coke Stewart released an informative decision vacating institution of inter partes review (“IPR”) based on two petitions that were primarily filed to present two different constructions....more

2,667 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 107

"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