News & Analysis as of

United States Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office is an agency of the United States Department of Commerce that serves a fundamental role in the U.S. intellectual property system by issuing patents and registering trademarks.... more +
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office is an agency of the United States Department of Commerce that serves a fundamental role in the U.S. intellectual property system by issuing patents and registering trademarks.    less -
Goodwin

PTAB Discretionarily Denies Two Petitions, Refers a Third to the Board in Amgen v. Bristol-Myers Squibb

Goodwin on

On July 24, 2025, Acting Director of the USPTO, Coke Morgan Stewart, denied institution of inter partes review in IPR2025-00601 and IPR2025-00602, but referred the petition in IPR2025-00603 to the Board in Amgen Inc. v....more

Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C.

“At Your Discretion” — Discretionary Denials Increase as PTAB Issues Institution Decisions

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

King & Spalding

USPTO Acting Director Stewart Limits Use of General Knowledge in IPR Petitions

King & Spalding on

On July 31, 2025, Acting USPTO Director Coke Morgan Stewart released a memo instructing the agency “that applicant admitted prior art (AAPA), expert testimony, common sense, and other evidence that is not ‘prior art...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

Jones Day

Cancellation of Claims Deemed An Inappropriate Sanction

Jones Day on

USPTO Acting Director Stewart sua sponte reconsidered and modified a previous Director Review decision that had affirmed cancellation of all 183 challenged claims as a sanction against patent owner Longhorn Vaccines. ...more

McDermott Will & Schulte

Use of general knowledge in IPR petitions will no longer work

On July 31, 2025, the US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO) issued a memo clarifying the requirements under 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(4) for inter partes review (IPR) petitions. The memo emphasizes that petitioners must clearly...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

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

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

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

ArentFox Schiff

USPTO Restricts Use of AAPA and Other General Knowledge Evidence in IPR Proceedings

ArentFox Schiff on

On July 31, the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued a new memorandum announcing that it will begin enforcing 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(4) that requires petitioners in inter partes review (IPR) proceeding to “specify...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

Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C.

July USPTO Guidance Sets Stricter Standards for Evidence in IPR Petitions

Acting Director of the USPTO, Coke Morgan Stewart, issued a memorandum last week that will change the way petitioners levy challenges to patents via inter partes review (IPR). The change will apply to any petition for IPR...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

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

USPTO Director: Board Abused Discretion by Instituting Two IPRs on Same Patent Based on Competing Claim Constructions

In a recent decision designated as Informative, the USPTO Director determined that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board abused its discretion by instituting two inter partes review proceedings challenging the same patent, based...more

WilmerHale

PTAB/USPTO Update - August 2025

WilmerHale on

On July 31, 2025, Acting Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the USPTO Coke Morgan Stewart issued a memorandum indicating that the USPTO “will enforce and no longer waive the requirement of...more

Fish & Richardson

USPTO Limits Use of General Knowledge in IPR Proceedings

Fish & Richardson on

On July 31, the United States Patent and Trademark Office issued a memorandum (“Memo”) announcing that the Office will renew enforcement of 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(4) (“Rule 104(b)(4)”) in inter partes review (IPR) proceedings....more

Mayer Brown

Reinvigorated Enforcement of Evidentiary Rules and the Permissible Uses of General Knowledge in Inter Partes Review

Mayer Brown on

On July 31, 2025, the Acting Director of the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued a significant memorandum that alters the evidentiary landscape for inter partes review (IPR) proceedings before the Patent Trial and...more

Womble Bond Dickinson

USPTO Removes Reliance on Applicant Admitted Prior Art in IPR Proceedings

Womble Bond Dickinson on

On July 31, 2025, the acting Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) published a memorandum making a significant change in Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) inter partes review (IPR) practice and...more

Venable LLP

PTAB Director Discretionarily Denies Opdivo® IPRs Based on Settled Expectations of Patent Owner

Venable LLP on

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

Baker Botts L.L.P.

Ex Parte Reexaminations Poised to Make a Quiet Comeback: Discretionary Denial Guidance for Inter Partes Reexamination May Increase...

Baker Botts L.L.P. on

Imagine this. You were just served with a Complaint for patent infringement and learn that, some years ago, your competitor was granted a patent giving them a legal monopoly to exclude others, including you, from making,...more

K&L Gates LLP

USPTO Director Ends IPR Against Midas Green Technologies

K&L Gates LLP on

On 25 July 2025, K&L Gates secured an important win for its client, Midas Green Technologies, LLC. Acting USPTO Director Coke Morgan Stewart granted Director review and denied institution of an inter partes review (IPR)...more

Alston & Bird

Patent Case Summaries | Week Ending July 25, 2025

Alston & Bird on

IGT v. Zynga Inc., No. 2023-2262 (Fed. Cir. (PTAB) July 22, 2025). Opinion by Taranto, joined by Prost and Reyna. IGT owns a patent related to secured virtual networks in gaming environments. After the patent application was...more

McDermott Will & Schulte

Game over: Prior interference doesn’t preclude IPR proceeding

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a Patent Trial & Appeal Board unpatentability determination during an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding, concluding that the Board’s decision to not apply...more

Knobbe Martens

Applicant Admitted Prior Art Can (Sometimes) Show Obviousness

Knobbe Martens on

SHOCKWAVE MED., INC., V. CARDIOVASCULAR SYS., INC. - Before Lourie, Dyk, and Cunningham.  Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. IPR2019-00405. In inter partes review...more

1,119 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 45

"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