686 articles · page 31 of 58
Justice Dept. Defends Challenge to APJ Appointments The latest constitutional challenge to the Patent Trial & Appeal Board (PTAB) involves the Appointments Clause. The Appointments Clause of the U.S. Constitution has been interpreted to require that only…
Previous PTAB Opinions Designated Precedential Yesterday, the Patent Trial & Appeal Board (PTAB) designated two older AIA trial decisions, and one recent decision, precedential. These three decisions follow last week’s Precedential Opinion Panel…
A little over a year ago, the patent-eligibility of software inventions was very bleak. Examiners maintained difficult Alice-based rejections (rejecting the claims as abstract ideas, judicial exceptions to patent-eligibility) and applicants had little…
Issue Joinder Debate Comes Full Circle As previously discussed, the Patent Trial & Appeal Board’s (PTAB) new Precedential Opinion Panel (POP) has considered its first case in Proppant Express Investments v. Oren Technologies , Case IPR2018-00914…
PTAB Updates Amendment Precedent Today, the Patent Trial & Appeal Board (PTAB) designated Lectrosonics, Inc. v. Zaxcom, Inc , (IPR2018-01129, 01130, Paper 15 (Feb. 25, 2019) precedential as to the agency’s interpretation of 35 U.S.C § 316(d),…
Close Trial Date to Doom Parallel IPR Petitions? Last September, the Patent Trial & Appeal Board (PTAB) found the advanced stage of a parallel district court proceeding weighed in favor of denying a follow-on, IPR petition. NHK Spring Co. Ltd. v.…
Burden on Patent Owner to Show Product Manual Available Does the use of a printed manual at the PTAB foreclose later use of the underlying product in litigation? We know from cases like In Star EnviroTech, Inc. v. Redline Detection, LLC et. al.,…
Does 315(b) Codify Party Notice or Patent Notice? Last summer, the Federal Circuit reversed the Patent Trial & Appeal Board’s (PTAB) practice of accepting IPR petitions as timely filed under 35 U.S.C. § 315(b) where a complaint for infringement…
Estopping a Winning Argument? One of the stranger developments of recent months has been the interpretation of PTAB estoppel (315(e)(2)) to foreclose a petitioner from pursuing arguments in a district court that were successful at the PTAB. That is, a…
Recent Decisions Find Meeting of Statutory Requirement Subject to Agency Discretion A properly filed AIA trial trial petition must name all real-parties-in-interest (RPI). The RPI requirement is recited by a number of IPR statutes, 35 U.S.C. § 312(a);…
Are Biosimilar Development Efforts Enough? In Momenta Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. ( here ), the Federal Circuit was poised to explore the level of biosimilar legwork that could satisfy Article III standing for appeal from an adverse…
Federal Circuit Summary Before Newman , Dyk, and Chen. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary : An injury-in-fact is required to establish Article III standing for judicial review of agency action, even if a statute permits such review.…
