686 articles · page 19 of 58
Joinder Estoppel Narrower Than Original Petition Estoppel Court’s have struggled with the meaning of the “reasonably could have raised” aspect of 315(e)(2) IPR estoppel . The CAFC has not had much opportunity to weigh in on this…
NETWORK-1 TECHNOLOGIES, INC. v. HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY, HEWLETT PACKARD ENTERPRISE COMPANY Before Prost, Newman, and Bryson. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. Summary: A party joined to an IPR under 35 U.S.C.…
PTAB Seeks Public Input Based on stakeholder feedback, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has added an online form ( here ) to the USPTO website that allows any member of the public to nominate any PTAB decision for precedential or informative…
Earlier this month we released our 2020 IPR Intelligence Report where we covered the top IPR law firms and attorneys by activity, success and performance. This 129-page report covered 7,708 IPR petitions filed in a 5-year period between July 1, 2015 and…
Transitional CBM Challenge Program Sunsets Today The America Invents Act (AIA) placed an expiration date on Covered Business Method (CBM) challenges. That is, CBM review proceedings were designed as a “transitional program” that would sunset 8…
Last week, we released our 4th Annual IPR Intelligence Report . For the first time this year, we dedicated an entire chapter to cover IPR cost and staffing. The goal was to help all stakeholders to better understand the current market and the cost…
CAFC Holds PTAB Joinder Decisions Reviewable Back in March, the Windy City panel (Prost, Plager, and O’Malley) originally held that § 315(c) was unambiguous that an existing “party” to a PTAB proceeding cannot be joined as a party .…
This morning we released our 4th Annual IPR Intelligence Report . This is one of our most popular IP Insight reports. As per our tradition, we covered a five year period from July 1, 2015, through June 30, 2020. During this period, a total of 7,708 IPR…
FACEBOOK, INC., V. WINDY CITY INNOVATIONS LLC Before Prost, Plager, and O’Malley. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary : The Federal Circuit has jurisdiction to review challenges to the Board's joinder decision in an instituted…
CHRISTY, INC. v. UNITED STATES Before LOURIE, REYNA, and HUGHES. Appeal from the Court of Federal Claims. Summary: The government’s refusal to refund patent issue and maintenance fees after patent claims are canceled during inter partes review does…
SECURITY PEOPLE, INC. v. IANCU Before Lourie, Wallach, and Hughes. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California Summary: Congress foreclosed the possibility of Administrative Procedure Act (APA) review of an Inter…
Agency Memorandum Clears Up Long Standing PTAB Debate…For Now Earlier this week, a guidance memo was issued to the Patent Trial & Appeal Board (PTAB) on the use of Applicant Admitted Prior Art (AAPA) in IPR proceedings. Much like the agency’s…
