Latest Posts › Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding

Share:

[Webinar] The Interplay Between District Court and PTAB: Estoppels, Evidentiary, Recovery - April 5th, 1:00 pm - 2:00 pm EDT

In conjunction with the release of the firm's year-in-review report, our speakers will discuss the recent cases surrounding IPR estoppels, evidentiary issues, and recovery, which notably highlight the interplay between the...more

2021 PTAB Year in Review: Analysis & Trends: Evidentiary Issues When Leveraging the Records in Parallel Proceedings Involving the...

Parallel proceedings before the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) are a common feature of district court litigation, and it is common for the factual records to overlap between these tribunals. As a result, questions...more

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2021 Decisions

[co-author: Jamie Dohopolski] Last year, the continued global COVID-19 pandemic forced American courts to largely continue the procedures set in place in 2020. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was no...more

2/9/2022  /  § 314(d) , 35 U.S.C. §315(e)(1) , Absolute Intervening Rights Doctrine , Abuse of Discretion , Administrative Patent Judges , Administrative Procedure Act , America Invents Act , Appeals , Appointments Clause , Arbitrary and Capricious , Article of Manufacture , Assignor Estoppel , Burden of Proof , Claim Construction , Collateral Estoppel , Commercial Success , Confidential Information , Constitutional Challenges , Demand Letter , Denial of Institution , Design Patent , Director of the USPTO , Dismissals , Doctrine of Prosecution Disclaimer , Due Process , Equitable Estoppel , Estoppel , Evidence , Ex Partes Reexamination , Executive Branch , Executive Powers , Federal Rules of Evidence , Final Written Decisions , Forum Selection , FRCP 52(c) , GATT , Inferior Officers , Intellectual Property Litigation , Intellectual Property Protection , Inter Partes Reexamination , Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding , International Trade Commission (ITC) , Intervening Acts , Inventions , Issue Preclusion , Judicial Review , Lack of Authority , Lack of Jurisdiction , Likelihood of Success , Minerva Surgical Inc. v Hologic Inc. , Motion for Summary Judgment , Motivation to Combine , Nexus , Non-Disclosure Agreement , Nonobvious , Obviousness , Ornamental Design , Parallel Proceedings , Patent Applications , Patent Filings , Patent Infringement , Patent Litigation , Patent Prosecution , Patent Trial and Appeal Board , Patent Validity , Patents , Petition for Writ of Certiorari , Pharmaceutical Patents , Post-Grant Review , Pre-GATT , Preliminary Injunctions , Principle Officers , Printed Publications , Prior Art , Real Party in Interest , Remand , Reversal , Rule 36 , Scope of Review , SCOTUS , Section 325(d) , Sua Sponte , Substantial Evidence , Totality of Evidence , United States v Arthrex Inc , USPTO , Vacated , Writ of Mandamus

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2020 Decisions: Thryv, Inc. v. Click-To-Call Technologies, Inc.,...

In Thryv, Inc v. Click-To-Call Technologies, LP, 140 S. Ct. 1367 (2020), the Supreme Court held that patent owners cannot appeal determinations by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board declining to apply the time bar of 35 U.S.C....more

Supreme Court Holds That PTAB Time-Bar Rulings Are Non-Appealable

In Thryv, Inc. v. Click-to-Call Technologies, LP the Supreme Court held, 7-2, that patent owners cannot appeal determinations by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) declining to apply the time-bar of 35 U.S.C. § 315(b)....more

2019 PTAB Year in Review: Analysis & Trends: IPR Estoppel Questions Answered and Remaining

When Congress created inter partes review (“IPR”) proceedings in the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, it included an estoppel provision to avoid duplicative validity challenges against the same patent claims.1 As set forth in...more

2019 PTAB Year in Review: Analysis & Trends

Powerful. Resilient. Ever-evolving. These characteristics of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) were on full display in 2019. This past year the PTAB received more than 1,300 inter partes review (IPR), post grant review...more

PTAB Strategies and Insights - February 2020

The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return on investment for all stakeholders looking at the entire...more

Federal Circuit Appeals From The PTAB: Summaries of Key 2019 Decisions: AVX Corp. v. Presidio Components, Inc., 923 F.3d 1357...

AVX Corporation, a company that manufactures and sells a variety of electronic components including capacitors, petitioned for inter partes review (IPR) of Presidio Components, Inc.’s patent directed to single-layer ceramic...more

Federal Circuit Appeals From The PTAB: Summaries of Key 2019 Decisions: Arctic Cat Inc. v. GEP Power Prod., Inc., 919 F.3d 1320...

GEP Power Products, Inc. petitioned for inter partes review (IPR) of two patents owned by Arctic Cat Inc. directed to an electrical-connection box for distributing power to various electrical components, including components...more

PTAB Strategies and Insights - November 2019: Arthrex Decision - Overview of Facts and Implications

This document provides a factual overview of the Federal Circuit’s decision in Arthrex v. Smith & Nephew, discusses the court’s remedy, and addresses implications for litigants with Patent Trial and Appeal Board cases pending...more

PTAB Strategies and Insights - September 2019: Federal Circuit Confirms in BioDelivery v. Aquestive that the PTAB Has Broad,...

In BioDelivery Sciences Int’l v. Aquestive Therapeutics, Inc., the Federal Circuit confirmed that the PTAB has broad discretion to reconsider institution decisions and terminate instituted proceedings even after trial has...more

Federal Circuit clarifies that a post-filing change in RPI status can trigger the § 315(b) time-bar

Federal Circuit clarifies that a post-filing change in RPI status can trigger the § 315(b) time-bar and that there are exceptions to issue preclusion in IPR appeals - On June 13, 2019, the Court of Appeals for the Federal...more

PTAB Precedent Opinion Panel Clarifies Standard for Joinder of Parties and Issues

On March 13, 2018, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)’s Precedential Opinion Panel (POP), consisting of Director Andrei Iancu, Commissioner of Patents Drew Hirshfeld, and newly appointed...more

2019 Report: Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB - Summaries of Key 2018 Decisions: Wi-Fi One v. Broadcom, 878 F.3D 1364 (FED....

Broadcom sought inter partes review of three patents owned by Wi-Fi One. In response to Broadcom’s petitions, Wi-Fi One argued that the IPR was barred under 35 U.S.C. § 315(b) because Broadcom was in privity with certain...more

2019 Report: Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB - Summaries of Key 2018 Decisions: SAS Institute v. Iancu, 138 S.CT. 1348...

SAS sought an inter partes review (IPR) of ComplementSoft’s patent. In its petition, SAS alleged that all of the patent’s claims were unpatentable. The PTAB determined to institute trial on some, but not all, of the...more

PTAB Strategies and Insights - January 2019: PTAB Only Partially Smokes Cannabis Patent

Eleven of thirteen cannabis patent claims survive PTAB challenge. Insys Development Company, Inc. filed a petition requesting inter partes review of claims 1-13 of GW Pharmaceutical Ltd.’s patent directed to the use of...more

PTAB Strategies and Insights - January 2019

The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return on investment for all stakeholders looking at the entire...more

PTAB Strategies and Insights - September 2018: Fifth 315(b) bar decision post WiFi One - CAFC Rules on RPI Identification Burden...

The Federal Circuit issued the fifth precedential decision involving the one year time-bar 35 U.S.C. § 315(b) since the issue became reviewable earlier this year in the wake of Wi-Fi One....more

SAS Decision’s Impact on Pending Appeals from the PTAB

Federal Circuit Sheds Some Light on How SAS May Impact Pending Appeals from the PTAB — Court Terminates Appeals of Partially-Instituted IPRs and Remands Back to the PTAB to Consider Non-Instituted “Claims and Grounds” in...more

Supreme Court Upholds IPR as a Valid Procedure for Challenging Patent Validity: Majority Reasons that Patents are Revocable...

By a majority of 7-2, the Supreme Court has ruled that inter partes review is a valid exercise of statutory authority vested in the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC,...more

Supreme Court Strikes Down PTAB Partial Institution Practice: If PTAB Institutes IPR, It Must Address All Challenged Claims in Any...

The Supreme Court has ruled by a narrow majority of 5-4 that the Patent Office’s regulation allowing for partial institution decisions in inter partes review is foreclosed by the text of 35 U.S.C. § 318(a). SAS Institute Inc....more

33 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

"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