On August 24, 2023, USPTO Director Kathi Vidal vacated a PTAB decision denying institution of inter partes review in Keysight Technologies, Inc. v. Centripetal Networks, Inc. and remanded the case for further proceedings. ...more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) recently published a revised PTAB Oral Hearing Guide (August 2023) updating prior guidance on hearings. The revised Guide includes changes to: 1. Remote participation in PTAB...more
Institution of an IPR is automatically barred if the “petition requesting the proceeding is filed more than 1 year after the date on which the petitioner…is served with the complaint alleging infringement of the patent.” 35...more
The PTAB recently denied institution of inter partes review of a patent directed to determining the pitch of roofs after finding that Petitioner failed to directly challenge the sufficiency of Patent Owner’s priority...more
The PTAB recently declined to apply Section 325(d) and instituted inter partes review after a patent owner unsuccessfully argued that the petition relied on substantially the same prior art as that which the Office had...more
On July 17, 2023, the Patent Trial and Appeals Board (“PTAB”) exercised its discretion under 35 U.S.C. § 314(a) to deny institution of an inter partes review petition based on the stature of a related U.S. District Court of...more
Although provisional applications can be used to secure an earlier date for 102(e), the petitioner bears the burden of production in establishing a prior art date for the asserted prior art. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board...more
In recent decision 3M Company v. Bay Materials, the Board denied 3M Company’s (“Petitioner”) second Petition for inter partes review (“Second Petition”) after exercising its discretion under § 314(a) and finding that each of...more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB” or “Board”) recently denied inter partes review (IPR) of an electrocardiography monitor patent under 35 U.S.C. §325(d), finding that the same or substantially the same prior art or...more
Recently, the PTAB held that Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. (“Petitioner”), met its burden in showing that a third party (the “Third Party”) was neither a real party-in-interest (“RPI”) nor in privity with Petitioner....more
Motions to amend (MTA) are becoming a more frequently used tool for patent owners litigating before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). When a patent is being challenged in an inter partes review (IPR) or post-grant...more
The PTAB recently exercised its discretion under 35 U.S.C. § 314 to deny institution of inter partes review for inefficient use of the PTAB’s time and resources notwithstanding that the petitioner met the threshold for...more
Congress implemented the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (“AIA”) to “establish a more efficient and streamlined patent system that [would] improve patent quality and limit unnecessary and counterproductive litigation costs.” ...more
The USPTO continues to seek public feedback on PTAB procedures and potential rule changes. In addition to soliciting comments on the many proposed rule changes announced on April 21, 2023, the USPTO also recently issued a...more
6/26/2023
/ America Invents Act ,
Comment Period ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Motion to Amend ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Proposed Rules ,
Regulatory Agenda ,
Regulatory Reform ,
USPTO
The Situation: The U.S. Supreme Court recently denied certiorari in Thaler v. Vidal, leaving intact the Federal Circuit's ruling that only human beings, and not artificial intelligence ("AI") systems, can be inventors under...more
6/23/2023
/ Algorithms ,
Artificial Intelligence ,
Denial of Certiorari ,
Intellectual Property Owner’s Association (IPO) ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Inventors ,
Machine Learning ,
Patent-Eligible Subject Matter ,
Patents ,
SCOTUS ,
USPTO
In a rare exercise of authority, the PTAB issued sanctions against a Patent Owner for failure to meet its duty of candor and good faith by withholding information relevant to the patentability of challenged and substitute...more
The USPTO issued an advance notice of proposed rules (“ANPRM”) on April 21, 2023 and is requesting comments and feedback from practitioners on proposed, proposed changes at the PTAB. The full ANPRM document is available on...more
On May 12, 2023, the Intel v. VLSI chronicle continued as the PTAB issued a final written decision holding that all of the challenged claims of VLSI’s U.S. Patent No. 7,725,759 (“the ’759 patent”) were unpatentable as...more
On May 10, 2023, a PTAB Panel excused the late filings of the Patent Owner and allowed over thirty exhibits and a Corrected Patent Owner Response (“CPOR”) to be submitted into the record in Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. v....more
On May 16, 2023, the Federal Circuit denied a petition for a writ of mandamus to direct the Board to vacate an institution decision based on stock ownership of an administrative patent judges (“APJ”) in In re Centripetal...more
The PTAB recently issued back-to-back Fintiv denials. The first denial issued on May 4, 2023. Read here about Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. v. California Institute of Tech., No. IPR2023-00130, Paper 10 (P.T.A.B. May 4,...more
The Board exercised discretion under § 314 to deny inter partes review in view of co-pending district court litigation. In the Institution Decision, the Board evaluated the Fintiv factors in light of the USPTO Director’s...more
In Short -
The Situation: Workforces are increasingly using generative artificial intelligence ("AI") platforms to generate diverse content ranging from marketing materials, translations, source code, and more....more
In Apple Inc. v. Masimo Corp., the PTAB granted Masimo, the owner of patent 10,687,745 (“the ’745 patent”), their request for production directed to “specific documents identified in regard to [a prior] ITC Investigation,...more
Petitioners should be cautious of introducing a new theory in a Petitioner Reply before the PTAB. On February 7, 2023, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) entered a final written decision declining to find any claims...more