News & Analysis as of

Patents Petitioner Reply Briefs

Fish & Richardson

2023 Post-Grant Annual Report

Fish & Richardson on

2023 was a busy year at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, as post-grant practice continued to evolve at a rapid pace. At the United States Patent and Trademark Office, there were big developments in Director Review and...more

Troutman Pepper

EDVA Judge Denies Motion to Strike New Evidence in Reply Brief and Transfers Patent Case to California

Troutman Pepper on

In an October 3 decision, U.S. District Judge Thomas S. Ellis III granted a motion to transfer venue of a patent case brought in the EDVA to California under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). Monarch Networking Solutions LLC .v Juniper...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

CVC Files Reply to Broad Opposition to CVC's Motion to Exclude Broad Evidence

On April 17th, CVC filed its Reply to Broad's Opposition (filed on April 9th) to CVC's Miscellaneous Motion No. 2 to Exclude Evidence filed (on April 2nd), in Interference No 106,155 between Senior Party The Broad Institute,...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

CVC Reply No. 2 to Broad's Opposition No. 2 to CVC's Motion No. 2 to Be Accorded Benefit of Priority

March 23rd was the deadline for the parties 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...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

CVC Reply No.1 to Broad's Opposition No. 1 to CVC's Motion No.1 to Be Accorded Benefit of Priority

March 23rd was a busy day at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) regarding Interference No. 106,115 between Senior Party The Broad Institute, Harvard University, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

PTAB Strikes from IPR Record References Introduced After Institution that Purportedly Showed State of the Art

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board has granted in part a Patent Owner’s motion to strike Petitioner’s Reply for improperly raising new arguments and citing new evidence. The Board, however, declined to throw out the entirety...more

Knobbe Martens

An Improper Reply to a Final Office Action May Result in the Accrual of Applicant Delay for PTA Calculations

Knobbe Martens on

INTRA-CELLULAR THERAPIES, INC v. IANCU - Before Wallach, Chen, and Hughes.  Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. Summary:  If a proper reply to a final Office Action is not...more

Knobbe Martens

Recent Update on Patent Trial Practice Guide

Knobbe Martens on

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) published an update to the AIA Trial Practice Guide (‘‘Trial Practice Guide’’) in August 2018 to revise guidance on practices before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board...more

WilmerHale

Federal Circuit Patent Updates - August 2018

WilmerHale on

Ericsson Inc. v. Intellectual Ventures I LLC (No. 2017-1521, 8/27/18) (Reyna, Taranto, Chen) Reyna, J. - Vacating and remanding the PTAB’s IPR decision because the PTAB erred in not considering portions of the petitioner’s...more

Knobbe Martens

Ericsson Inc. v. Intellectual Ventures I LLC.

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Summary - Before Reyna, Taranto, and Chen. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: The Board must consider arguments in an IPR petitioner’s reply, where the arguments expressly follow...more

10 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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