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
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
The Federal Circuit recently vacated a decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board after concluding that the board’s analysis of licensing evidence offered as a secondary consideration of nonobviousness constituted legal...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
CrowdStrike, Inc. v. GoSecure, Inc., Nos. IPR2025-00068, -00070 (June 25, 2025) (designated informative on June 26, 2025). Order by Stewart, Acting Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Acting Director of...more
USPTO Acting Director Coke Morgan Stewart recently vacated and remanded three Final Written Decisions from the PTAB. Semiconductor Components Indus. v. Greenthread, LLC, IPR2023-01242, IPR2023-01243, IPR2023-01244, Paper 94...more
Semiconductor Components Indus., LLC v. Greenthread LLC, IPR2023-01242, -01243, -01244 (USPTO Apr. 30, 2025) - The USPTO Director’s recent decision in Semiconductor Components v. Greenthread squarely addresses a recurring...more
The USPTO Director vacated the board’s decision to institute inter partes review based on an erroneous application of the Fintiv factors. Specifically, the Director found that the board placed too much emphasis on...more
On August 22, 2024, Hulu, LLC (“Hulu”) filed two separate petitions for inter partes review (“IPR”) of U.S. Patent No. 11,463,768 (“the ’768 Patent”), assigned to Piranha Media Distribution, LLC (“Piranha”). The ’768 Patent...more
On March 24, 2025, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal Circuit) issued a decision titled In Re: Riggs (the Riggs decision) that vacated a decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) of the US...more
Wash World Inc. v. Belanger Inc., No. 2023-1841 (Fed. Cir. (E.D. Wis.) Mar. 24, 2025). Opinion by Stark, joined by Lourie and Prost. Belanger sued Wash World for infringement of a patent related to a spray type car wash...more
Last week, my partner Justin Krieger published an alert regarding Acting Director Stewart's new guidance on discretionary denial. Shortly thereafter, Acting Director Stewart issued a decision vacating institution of several...more
In re: Riggs, Appeal No. 2022-1945 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 24, 2025) Our Case of the Week explores the power of an examiner to request a rehearing after the Board has entered a decision on an application. The case also relates to...more
Apple Inc. v. Gesture Technology Partners, LLC, Appeal Nos. 2023-1475, -1533 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 4, 2025) Our Case of the Week is a high-stakes appeal from an inter partes review concerning a patent titled “Camera Based...more
2024 brought exciting developments at the Federal Circuit. The court issued its first en banc decision in a patent case in five years in LKQ, which significantly altered the standard for proving obviousness of a design...more
Abuse of Process and/or Sanctions – 37 C.F.R. § 42.12 - Spectrum Solutions LLC v. Longhorn Vaccines & Diagnostics, LLC, IPR2021-00847, IPR2021-00850, IPR2021-00854, IPR2021-00857 & IPR2021-00860 - Decision...more
CloudofChange, LLC v. NCR Corp., Appeal No. 2023-1111 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 18, 2024) In our Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit addressed the question of divided infringement in the context of system claims. In its...more
The ’903 patent, entitled “Correlating Packets In Communications Networks,” discloses a computing system that can identify and correlate packets (“small segments that together make up a larger communication”) received and...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied a patent owner’s motion to voluntarily dismiss the appeal following the Federal Circuit’s decision to vacate and remand the case to the Patent Trial & Appeal Board but...more
Cisco Systems, Inc. et al. v. K.Mizra LLC, Appeal Nos. 2022-2290, 2023-1183 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 19, 2024) In the Federal Circuit’s only precedential action this week, a panel of the Court declined to dismiss an appeal after...more
On September 16, 2024, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) issued an opinion vacating and remanding a decision from the District Court of Minnesota which held the asserted claims of medical...more
What Makes a Case Exceptional? Panel: Chief Judge Moore and Judges Lourie and Albright,[1] with Judge Albright authoring the opinion. You should read this case if: you are seeking or opposing an award of attorneys’ fees under...more
On April 5, 2024, Director Vidal vacated and remanded the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB’s) denial of institution of inter partes review (IPR) where the Petitioner relied on a drawing in a prior art patent document to...more
SnapRays v. Lighting Defense Group, Appeal No. 2023-1184 (Fed. Cir. May 2, 2024) Our Case of the Week deals with an issue the Court has not addressed recently: the question of declaratory judgment jurisdiction....more
The USPTO Director vacated a Patent Trial and Appeal Board decision denying institution of inter partes review for not addressing alleged differences between references in the petition and those considered during prosecution....more
Addressing when a drawing in a prior art reference includes a teaching that is “clear on its face,” the Director of the US Patent & Trademark Office vacated and remanded a Patent Trial & Appeal Board decision denying...more