Podcast - Bring Out the Bad Stuff
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 318: Quick Tips -- The Final Two-Week Bar Exam Countdown
Preparing for Deposition Success
How to Prevent Executives from Saying the Wrong Thing When Testifying
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 328: Listen and Learn -- Expert vs. Lay Witness Testimony (Evidence)
Law Brief®: Michael Grudberg, Robert Heim and Richard Schoenstein Discuss the Theranos Verdict
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 138: Listen and Learn -- Hearsay Exceptions: Prior Testimony and Past Recollection Recorded
Devil in the Details: Gilbert King on Truth and Transparency in the Judicial Process
Podcast - Rule 4: Be a Relentlessly Polite Witness
Podcast - Rule 2: Remember, You Are On The Record
Podcast - Rule 1: Witness, Take Your Time
Three Witness Excuses to Avoiding Preparing
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) denied institution of an inter partes review (IPR) brought by Par-Kan Company, LLC against Unverferth Manufacturing Company regarding U.S. Patent No. 8,967,940 (“the ‘940 patent”). ...more
On June 6, 2024, the PTAB issued a Final Written Decision concluding claims 1-6 of U.S. Patent No. 8,899,655 B1 (“the ’655 patent”) unpatentable. Yita LLC v. MacNeil IP LLC, IPR2023-00172, Paper 70 (PTAB Jun. 6, 2024)...more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board has granted a petitioner’s motion to submit supplemental information, over patent owner’s objections, concerning the public availability of references that were relied upon to support grounds...more
Google petitioned for IPR of two patents owned by IPA. Each of the asserted grounds relied on the Martin reference. Martin lists as authors the two inventors of the challenged patents and a third person, Dr. Moran. During...more
As part of the recovery from the global COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit took steps to return to normal operations. It began requiring live oral arguments in August 2022 and, by November,...more
USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decisions in 2021 show that antedating a prior-art reference remains a viable option to knock out a ground in an inter partes review (IPR) petition—patent owners were successful in...more
[co-author: Jamie Dohopolski] Love it or hate it, ignore the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) at your peril. The introduction of the PTAB as part of the America Invents Act over ten years ago has forever changed...more
The United State Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently affirmed a decision by the United States District Court for the Central District of California, setting aside a judgment and injunction in a patent...more
Motion practice continues in Interference No. 106,115 between Senior Party The Broad Institute, Harvard University, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (collectively, "Broad") and Junior Party the University of...more
The Board has broad discretion to determine how much weight should be given to inventor testimony, but as long as the testimony does not relate to the inventor’s opinion about the meaning of a claim term, there is no basis...more
In EmeraChem v Volkswagen the Circuit reverses a determination of obviousness because the ?Board did not provide the patentee with an adequate opportunity to address a prior art reference ?that formed a principal basis for...more
Our report includes discussions of six of the precedential cases decided in the past week and will include the other three cases in next week’s report. In Aylus v. Apple, the panel finds prosecution disclaimer in a...more
On August 19, 2015, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) released proposed rule changes for trials before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). The proposed rule changes were made in response to input...more