-
Archives
Categories
- Adjudicative instead of examinatorial (2)
- America Invents Act (86)
- Aqua Products (1)
- Boardside Chat Report (1)
- Book and Article Reviews (1)
- BRI v. Phillips Construction Issues (1)
- Broadest Reasonable Interpretation standard (16)
- claim challenges (40)
- indefiniteness (5)
- patent-eligible subject matter (17)
- prior art (13)
- statutory subject matter (8)
- Claim Construction (18)
- Claim Preclusion (1)
- clear and convincing evidence (7)
- doctrine of claim differentiation (2)
- Ex Parte Prosecution (23)
- Federal Circuit (17)
- Federal Circuit Review of PTAB Proceedings (4)
- inequitable conduct (2)
- inter partes review (73)
- 315(b) One Year Bar (7)
- estoppel (14)
- IPR Joinder (4)
- Motion to Amend (3)
- serial petitions (2)
- IPR (2)
- Issue Preclusion (1)
- ITC (1)
- joint infringement (1)
- Litigation (85)
- Damages (17)
- enhanced damages (1)
- future damages (3)
- intervening rights (5)
- past damages (9)
- estoppel from administrative proceeding (11)
- Expert (2)
- Joinder Post AIA (5)
- Phillips claim construction (1)
- Prosecution Bar (4)
- Protective Order (3)
- stay (11)
- factors for stay (8)
- Damages (17)
- Mandamus Actions in the Federal Circuit (4)
- Patent Portfolio Management (2)
- Patent Reform (51)
- petitions practice (12)
- Phillips-type construction (7)
- Post Grant Review (71)
- preponderance of evidence (8)
- pro hac vice admission (3)
- PRPS Patent Review Processing System (13)
- PTAB (82)
- PTAB Patent Trials (49)
- PTO Sued Under the APA (11)
- reexamination generally (57)
- Reissue (6)
- Settlements in Post-Grant Proceedings (3)
- software patents (2)
- States rights and sovereign immunity (2)
- supplemental examination (3)
- Supreme Court Review of post-grant issues (2)
- Termination of Post-Grant Proceedings (9)
- Uncategorized (64)
- Webinar (1)
Monthly Archives: June 2013
SAP Joins PTO against Versata in Eastern District of Virginia
You may recall that Versata sued the Patent Office in the Eastern District of Virginia to challenge the PTAB’s decision to institute a CBM review of Versata’s U.S. 6,553,350 patent. Versata Development Group, Inc. v. Rea, 1:13-cv-00328-GBL-IDD (E.D. VA). It turns out … Continue reading
Posted in America Invents Act, covered business methods, Patent Reform, Post Grant Review, PTAB, PTAB Patent Trials, PTO Sued Under the APA
Tagged Bianchi, CBM, covered business method, federal circuit, patent, patent claims, patent litigation, patent reform, patent trial and appeal board, PGR, Post Grant Review, reexam, reexamination, Tim Bianchi
Leave a comment
SAP Moves for a Stay of Parallel Federal Circuit Action After PTAB Win
SAP’s fight to dismiss Versata’s U.S. 6,553,350 patent assertion continues. After SAP’s win in the PTAB on June 11, 2013, SAP filed a motion to stay the parallel Federal Circuit appeal on June 17th. Now the Federal Circuit must decide … Continue reading
Posted in America Invents Act, claim challenges, covered business methods, Federal Circuit, patent-eligible subject matter, Post Grant Review, PTAB, Stay in Federal Circuit
Tagged appeal, Bianchi, CBM, claims, covered business method, federal circuit, Federal Circuit Stay, litigation, motion to stay, patent, patent litigation, patent trial and appeal board, PTAB, SAP, stay, Tim Bianchi, Versata
Leave a comment
PTAB CBM: Versata Patent Claims Unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 101
On June 11, 2013, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued a decision holding claims 17 and 26-29 of Versata’s 6,553,350 patent unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 101. This decision arises from a petition filed on Sep. 16, 2012, in a … Continue reading
Posted in America Invents Act, Broadest Reasonable Interpretation standard, claim challenges, Claim Construction, covered business methods, ex parte reexamination, Litigation, Patent Reform, patent-eligible subject matter, Phillips-type construction, Post Grant Review, PTAB, PTAB Patent Trials, PTO Sued Under the APA, reexamination generally
Tagged Bianchi, CBM, claims, covered business method, ex parte reexamination, federal circuit, issued patent, litigation, motion to stay, patent, patent claims, patent litigation, patent reform, patent trial and appeal board, PTAB, reexam, reexamination, Tim Bianchi
1 Comment
Joinder in Patent Office Proceedings Clarified by PTAB
Several posts ago we explored how the Board perceived joinder of a subsequent petition filed by a petitioner to an ongoing proceeding. A recent ruling by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) clarifies how the Board views joinder of … Continue reading
Posted in America Invents Act, covered business methods, inter partes review, Joinder of AIA Proceedings, Joinder of Parties Post-petition, Post Grant Review, PTAB, PTAB Patent Trials
Tagged Bianchi, CBM, covered business method, inter partes review, IPR, joinder of parties post-petition, patent trial and appeal board, PGR, Post Grant Review, PTAB, Tim Bianchi
Leave a comment
AIA Post-Grant Practice Rapidly Integrates Federal Circuit and Board Decisions
AIA post-grant practice has many advantages over other proceedings, but one of the great benefits of AIA post-grant practice that we have not discussed is the speed in which AIA post-grant proceedings adopt recent patent decisions from different sources. This … Continue reading
Posted in America Invents Act, claim challenges, covered business methods, estoppel, Ex Parte Prosecution, Litigation, Patent Reform, patent-eligible subject matter, petitions practice, Post Grant Review, PTAB, PTAB Patent Trials
Tagged Bianchi, CBM, claims, covered business method, estoppel, federal circuit, issued patent, litigation, patent, patent claims, patent litigation, patent reform, patent trial and appeal board, petition, PGR, Post Grant Review, PTAB, Tim Bianchi
2 Comments