News & Analysis as of

Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding Patent Litigation United States Patent and Trademark Office

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Historical Development of Substantial New Question contrasted with the new Section 325(d) Criteria

Ex parte reexamination proceedings have been available for over 40 years. The reexamination statutes, Public Law 96-517 of July 1, 1981 (also known as the Bayh-Dole Act), included 35 U.S.C. § 303, which codified, in part,...more

Erise IP

Eye on IPRs, October 2024: USPTO Issues Final PTAB Procedure Rules

Erise IP on

Every month, Erise’s patent attorneys review the latest inter partes review cases and news to bring you the stories that you should know about: USPTO Issues Final Rules on PTAB Procedure - The U.S. Patent and...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Legal Lens on the Unified Patent Court | October 2024

McDermott Will & Emery on

The Unified Patent Court (UPC) is revolutionizing the way patents are enforced in Europe, and McDermott’s intellectual property (IP) team is here to help you navigate this dynamic landscape. Our Legal Lens on the Unified...more

Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati

The PTAB Review - October 2024

The PTAB Review begins by exploring collateral estoppel from unpatentability determinations in inter partes review (IPR) proceedings. Next, it summarizes recent developments at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office relevant to...more

Jones Day

PTO Promotes Judicial Independence in Final PTAB Rule

Jones Day on

On June 12, 2024, the USPTO issued a final rule governing the pre-issuance circulation and review of decisions within the PTAB. This formalized current USPTO procedures within the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP4) adopted...more

DLA Piper

USPTO Director’s Decision Highlights Consequences of Evidence Suppression

DLA Piper on

In a rare exercise of authority through a sua sponte director review, US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Director Kathi Vidal affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)’s decision to sanction patent owner Longhorn...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Federal Circuit Clarifies Test for Exception to Increasingly Rare Interference Proceedings

Speck v. Bates, No. 2023-1147 (Fed. Cir. May 23, 2024) addressed two issues, (1) whether courts should apply a one-way test or a two-way test to determine if pre-critical claims materially differ from post-critical claims,...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP - Federal Circuitry

What Makes a Case Exceptional?

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

Baker Donelson

Patent Cases to Watch for in the Second Half of 2024

Baker Donelson on

As we move into the second half of the year, we are alerting you to 11 patent cases that you should look out for during the second half of 2024. This judicial mix touches on a range of industries and interests, such as...more

Jones Day

Federal Circuit Clarifies Scope of Patent Owner Estoppel

Jones Day on

The Federal Circuit recently issued a decision in SoftView LLC v. Apple Inc. clarifying the scope of patent owner estoppel set forth in 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(d)(3)(i). 2024 WL 3543902 (Fed. Cir. July 26, 2024). The regulation...more

Erise IP

Eye on IPRs, August 2024: Federal Circuit Rules on Arguments Not Raised in Request for Rehearing, USPTO Director’s Potential...

Erise IP on

Every month, Erise’s patent attorneys review the latest inter partes review cases and news to bring you the stories that you should know about: Federal Circuit Addresses Waiver of Argument Not Raised in Request for...more

Jones Day

Director Says Not Filing Mandatory Notices and POPR Does Not Justify Adverse Judgment

Jones Day on

In a sua sponte Director Review, USPTO Director Vidal vacated an adverse judgement against Patent Owner for Patent Owner’s failure to submit a mandatory notice of information or file a preliminary response to a Petition...more

Erise IP

Eye on IPRs, July 2024: Impact of the End of Chevron on USPTO; PTAB Filings Are Up; and More

Erise IP on

Every month, Erise’s patent attorneys review the latest inter partes review (IPR) cases and news to bring you the stories that you should know about: What Does the End of Chevron Deference Mean for the USPTO? In June, the...more

Dinsmore & Shohl LLP

Estoppel Principles in Patent Office Proceedings

Dinsmore & Shohl LLP on

On July 26, 2024, in a precedential decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) upheld and expounded on the estoppel provision set forth in 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(d)(3)(i). The CAFC confirmed that the Patent...more

Baker Botts L.L.P.

Intellectual Property Report - August 2024

Baker Botts L.L.P. on

Be an Expert: Precedential PTAB Decision on Conclusory Expert TestimonyStutti TilwaA recent precedential decision from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) may serve as a warning for those parties who plan on relying on...more

Baker Botts L.L.P.

Be an Expert: Precedential PTAB Decision on Conclusory Expert Testimony

Baker Botts L.L.P. on

A recent precedential decision from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) may serve as a warning for those parties who plan on relying on expert declarations in their inter partes reviews (“IPR”). On August 24, 2022, the...more

Fish & Richardson

How the Timing of Director Review May Affect Co-Pending Litigation

Fish & Richardson on

Director Review at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) remains a hot topic in patent law. The Director first established an interim process for Director Review in the wake of the Supreme Court’s 2021 decision in United...more

WilmerHale

Federal Circuit Patent Watch: Ordering In-Person Appearance to Testify Regarding Potential Fraud on the Court is within Court's...

WilmerHale on

Precedential and Key Federal Circuit Opinions - 1.  BACKERTOP LICENSING LLC [OPINION] (23-2367, 23-2368, 24-1016, 24-1017 Prost, Hughes, and Stoll) - Hughes, J. The Court affirmed the District Court’s orders (1)...more

Harris Beach PLLC

Court Ruling on Design Patents Could Have Huge Impact

Harris Beach PLLC on

A recent Federal Circuit decision overturning the long-standing obviousness test for design patents could have wide-ranging implications for design patent owners. The en banc decision in LKQ Corp. et al v. GM Global...more

Jones Day

PTAB Statistics Through Seven Months of FY2024

Jones Day on

The institution rate for post-grant petitions in FY 2024 through the end of April 2024 (the period from Oct. 1, 2023 through April 30, 2024) stands at 66% (427 instituted, 230 denied). This rate remains flat compared to the...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Submitting Trade Secret, Proprietary, and Protective Order Materials in Reexamination and Reissue

The requirement for disclosure, candor, and good faith between an applicant/patent owner and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) serves an important public interest. Succinctly, each individual associated with the...more

Jones Day

LKQ v. GM: PTAB and Examiner Guidance on Design Patent Obviousness from USPTO

Jones Day on

Those following this blog knew change was coming to design patent obviousness in the LKQ v. GM decision by the en banc Federal Circuit. In its May 21, 2024 decision, the court overruled the long-standing Rosen-Durling test...more

Fenwick & West LLP

Should a Printed Publication Be Considered in Inter Partes Reviews Based Only on its Publication Date?

Fenwick & West LLP on

Lynk Labs has presented an argument to the Federal Circuit, asserting that patent applications should only be utilized to invalidate patents in inter partes reviews based on their publication date. Currently, the filing date...more

Fenwick & West LLP

Understanding Director Vidal's Impact on Inter Partes Review Procedures

Fenwick & West LLP on

United States Patent and Trademark Office Director Kathi Vidal's recent decision emphasizes the importance of General Plastic factor 1 in cases where there is no significant relationship between multiple petitioners. ...more

McDermott Will & Emery

For Statutory Equivalents, Even One Means May Be Enough

A US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO) appeals review panel decided that a means-plus-function (M+F) claim element supported by the disclosure of only a single species is not invalid for indefiniteness or lack of written...more

602 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 25

"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