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)
Category Archives: Uncategorized
Patent Office Director Vidal Finds OpenSky’s IPR Conduct to be Abuse of Process
Director Vidal issued a careful decision concerning OpenSky’s copycat filings and subsequent conduct in OpenSky Industries, LLC v. VLSI Technology LLC, IPR2021-01064, Paper 102. The conclusion provides a great summary of her findings: Viewed as a whole, OpenSky’s … Continue reading
Posted in Uncategorized
Leave a comment
What’s Important Now in Intellectual Property?
With all that is going on in world events and a pandemic that has raged on for over a year, it’s hard to focus on intellectual property as an important topic to discuss. But we must because innovation has carried … Continue reading
Thanks to IAM for the Global Leaders 2020 Designation
In case you are interested in a recent interview IAM conducted about US patent law and post-grant activities, the link with my comments is here. Thanks to IAM for the Global Leaders 2020 award. To all my colleagues and clients, thank … Continue reading
Posted in Uncategorized
Tagged CBM, covered business method review, Global Leaders 2020, IAM, inter pares review, IPR, PGR, Post Grant Review
Leave a comment
PTO Brief Argues Why PTAB Can Issue Decisions On Remand From FedCir
Under the America Invents Act IPRs are supposed to be completed with a final written decision no later than a maximum of 18 mos after institution. But if the FedCir remands for further findings on appeal can the PTAB issue … Continue reading
PTAB Expanded Panel Decides Sovereign Immunity Is Waived For District Court Patent Assertions by State Entities
Sovereign immunity has been a topic of great debate ever since the Patent Trial and Appeal Board applied it to dismiss inter partes reviews (IPRs) involving state owned patent rights. In Covidien v. University of Florida Research Foundation the Board dismissed three IPRs … Continue reading
PTAB Boardside Chat Provides Statistics About Multiple IPR Petition Filings
On October 24, 2017, PTAB Chief Judge David Ruschke and Lead Judge William Saindon conducted a webinar covering filing statistics for IPR petition filings, and in particular how multiple petitions have fared statistically in the PTAB. They also announced three informative decisions relating … Continue reading
10 Minute Webinar on IPR Claim Amendments In View of Aqua Products
If you are interested in knowing more about amendments in IPR proceedings and the practical impact of the Federal Circuit’s en banc Aqua Products decision, click here to view a brief 10 minute presentation.
Shire’s Granted Motion to Amend Offers Additional Insight Into PTAB Amendment Practice
When a patent undergoes review at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”), the Patent Owner has an opportunity to file a motion to amend claims so that a substitute claim can be proposed for each claim sought to be amended. … Continue reading
Posted in claim challenges, inter partes review, Motion to Amend, prior art, PTAB, Uncategorized
Tagged Amerigen, Bianchi, Idle Free, inter partes review, IPR, Masterimage, Motion to Amend, no new feature in amendment, patent claims, patent trial and appeal board, PTAB, Shire, Tim Bianchi
Leave a comment
Best Practices and Strategies for Patent Procurement and Enforcement Webinar Series
Looking for a holistic view of best practices and strategies for patent procurement and enforcement? You are invited to attend a free, two-part webinar on best patent practices. Click this link to register. I will be co-presenting with Christopher Larus of … Continue reading
Posted in Uncategorized
Leave a comment
PTAB Narrows Its Preliminary Claim Interpretation To Uphold Cellular Patent
In July, 2014 Ericsson Inc. and Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (“Ericsson”) petitioned for inter partes review of claims 1, 2, 8-12 and 18-22 of U.S. Patent No. 7,787,431 owned by Intellectual Ventures II LLC (“IV”). In February, 2015, the Board instituted … Continue reading
Posted in Broadest Reasonable Interpretation standard, claim challenges, Claim Construction, Expert Witnesses, inter partes review, prior art, PTAB, Uncategorized
Tagged Bianchi, claims, inter partes review, IPR, patent claims, patent trial and appeal board, preponderance of the evidence, PTAB, Tim Bianchi
Leave a comment