4 Key Takeaways | Updates in Standard Essential Patent Licensing and Litigation
Behaving Badly: OpenSky v. VLSI and Sanctions at the PTAB — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Scott McKeown Discusses PTAB Trends and Growth of Wolf Greenfield’s Washington, DC Office
Wolf Greenfield Attorneys Preview What’s Ahead in 2024
USPTO Director Review — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
5 Key Takeaways | PTAB Update: The Waning Impact of Fintiv on Discretionary Denials
3 Key Takeaways | Third party Prior Art Submissions at USPTO
Discretionary Denials at the PTAB: What to Expect? - Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Fish Post Grant Radio: Episode #16: Kevin McNish, McNish PLLC
Fish Post-Grant Radio: Episode #15: Nick Tsui, Alston & Bird
Secondary Considerations of Non-Obviousness - Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Fish Post-Grant Radio: Episode #14: Tom Rozylowicz
Fish Post-Grant Radio: Episode #13: Rick Bisenius
JONES DAY TALKS®: Supreme Court Rules on Constitutionality of Administrative Patent Judges
Five Impactful USPTO Procedural Developments for Patent Practitioners
Jones Day Talks®: Patent Litigation, PTAB, Iancu's Legacy, and Institution Discretion
The Briefing: COVID 19 Bill Stimulates the Economy and Changes in the Intellectual Property Law
[IP Hot Topics Podcast] Innovation Conversations: Andrei Iancu
Fallout from the Fintiv Precedential Decision
Six Things You Should Know About Inter Partes Review
Navigating patent infringement claims requires a deep understanding of both the legal landscape and the specifics of the technology at stake, especially in the fast-evolving cybersecurity sector. Creative litigation...more
Harris Brumfield v. IBG LLC, Appeal No. 2022-1630 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 27, 2024) In our case of the week, the Federal Circuit addressed three issues in a dispute that dates back to 2010, and has been to the Court on three...more
The Western District of Texas recently denied a defendant’s motion to stay pending inter partes review based in part on the defendant’s status as a non-party in the IPR proceedings. In doing so, the district court focused on...more
On November 18, 2022, a panel of three PTAB administrative patent judges denied a Patent Owner’s Request for Additional Discovery in Twitter, Inc. v. Palo Alto Research Center Inc., IPR2021-01398. The PTAB found that...more
The PTAB in a recent PGR proceeding: SWM International, LLC et al v. DynaEnergetics Europe GmbH (PGR2021-00097), reiterated the requirements for additional discovery. In particular, in this matter, the petitioner, having...more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) recently denied a Petitioner’s Motion for Additional Discovery. Scientific Design Co., Inc. v. Shell Oil Co., IPR2021-01537, Paper 18 (PTAB Aug. 12, 2022). In an inter partes review...more
On May 3, 2022, a panel of three PTAB administrative patent judges granted a motion for additional discovery in TCL Industries Holdings Co., Ltd. v. Parkervision, Inc., IPR2021-00985, (PTAB 2022), in which the PTAB deemed the...more
Referencing the use of antecedents from a “wherein” clause, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a district court’s claim construction and vacated its summary judgment ruling of indefiniteness that relied...more
This post continues our summary of substantive orders in patent litigation in the District of Minnesota. This summary includes discovery relevant to willfulness findings, stays under the customer suit exception, and...more
Following the grant of institution of a recent IPR petition in the matter of Satco Products, Inc. v. The Regents of the University of California, IPR2021-00662, Paper 26 (PTAB Feb. 11, 2022) concerning U.S. Patent No....more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) recently denied a Motion for Additional Discovery because the movant could not prove beyond mere speculation that the requested documents would be useful to show witness scripting....more
As a Patent Owner in an instituted Inter Partes Review (IPR), there are dozens of considerations to bear in mind – from strategically approaching depositions and maximizing expert testimony, to drafting the final say in your...more
In a series of related inter partes review proceedings, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board recently granted a petitioner’s motion to strike the sworn affidavit of a witness who was unwilling to submit to cross-examination. In...more
In an inter partes review (IPR), the scope of discovery is expressly stated in the C.F.R. and additional discovery must either be agreed upon by the parties or granted by the Board when it “is necessary in the interest of...more
The availability of post-grant proceedings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has changed the face of patent litigation. This monthly digest is designed to keep you up-to-date by highlighting interesting PTAB,...more
In Unified Patents, LLC f/k/a Unified Patents Inc. v. Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute (IPR2021-00827), the PTAB denied a patent owner’s request to file a motion for additional discovery into any real...more
In our previous post we started talking about discovery procedures in inter partes review (“IPR”) proceedings under 37 CFR § 42.51 and, in particular, the scope and timing of seeking limited additional discovery under Rule...more
Discovery procedures in inter partes review (“IPR”) proceedings, governed by 37 CFR § 42.51, are more limited in scope and timing compared to cases in district court. There are three types of discovery at the Patent Trial...more
Discovery in an IPR proceeding is limited compared to district court litigation in order to focus the proceedings and promote speed and efficiency. The PTAB Practice Guide and 37 C.F.R 42.51 provide for three types of...more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board denied a patent owner’s motion for additional discovery of documents—from petitioners, real parties-in-interest, and third parties—because patent owner failed to show that such discovery...more
Over the course of the past year, trial attorneys in state and federal courts have seen cases effectively stayed by COVID-related delays. COVID hampered in-person discovery and caused courts to re-set jury trial dates. Such...more
The regulations governing discovery in an inter partes review ("IPR") proceeding do not provide for the same methods of discovery available in a patent infringement lawsuit. As such, when opportunities for discovery...more
As discussed in our previous post, one of the most critical tasks for Patent Owners during the Inter Partes Reviews (“IPR”) discovery period is deposing the Petitioner’s expert. Since IPR depositions are treated differently...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
Join us for a one-day virtual event for Counsel for Hatch-Waxman Litigators. While COVID-19 prevented us from meeting in person this April in NYC, we are pleased to announce a special one-day virtual event Paragraph IV on...more