Tag Archives: patent claims

Federal Circuit’s Aqua Products Decision Clarifies Burden on IPR Petitioner to Challenge Amended Claims

On October 4, 2017, the Federal Circuit issued a lengthy decision in Aqua Products v. Matal, spanning five opinions and 148 pages, which addressed the proper allocation of the burden of proof when amended claims are offered during inter partes review proceedings (“IPRs”).  Aqua Prods. v. … Continue reading

Posted in Adjudicative instead of examinatorial, Broadest Reasonable Interpretation standard, claim challenges, estoppel from administrative proceeding, Federal Circuit Review of PTAB Proceedings, Motion to Amend, preponderance of evidence, reexamination generally, Settlements in Post-Grant Proceedings, Termination of Post-Grant Proceedings | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

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 , , , , , , , , , , , , | 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 , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Are Patent-Friendly PTAB Decisions On the Rise?

Patent litigation changed with passage of the America Invents Act. Overnight the PTAB became a new venue for challenging patent claims using IPRs, CBMs and PGRs. The initial reaction by the patent bar to the PTAB’s “take charge” approach to … Continue reading

Posted in America Invents Act, claim challenges, Claim Construction, Damages, Future of PTAB Trial Practice, inter partes review, Litigation, Post Grant Review, preponderance of evidence, prior art, PTAB, PTAB Patent Trials, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

IPRs And Settlement of Patent Infringement Cases

The passage of the AIA is still relatively recent, yet statistics are starting to emerge that demonstrate the effective use of IPRs to settle patent infringement cases.  IAM magazine recently published an interesting report by Unified Patents showing that IPRs have … Continue reading

Posted in America Invents Act, claim challenges, inter partes review, prior art, Settlements in Post-Grant Proceedings | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Federal Circuit Reinforces PTAB’s Authority to Institute Trial on Selected Claims in Synopsis v. Mentor Graphics Appeal

Newcomers to post-grant proceedings are often surprised by the PTAB’s claim-by-claim approach to patent challenges under the America Invents Act.  When reporting statistics about IPRs, commentators tend to ignore these considerations: First, an IPR petition can be drafted to challenge all or some … Continue reading

Posted in America Invents Act, Broadest Reasonable Interpretation standard, claim challenges, clear and convincing evidence, doctrine of claim differentiation, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Are Your Patent Procurement Guidelines Outdated?

  I saw a bumper sticker that said:  “Change is inevitable, but growth is optional.”  This is true in many facets of life, and it is true for patent practice.  The changes of the past few years are numerous and … Continue reading

Posted in America Invents Act, Future of PTAB Trial Practice, Litigation, Post Grant Review, PTAB Patent Trials | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Unified Patents’ Institution Decision Gives Insight to PTAB’s Real Party in Interest Analysis

Those watching decisions from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) have observed a trend where a patent owner challenges an IPR petition based on alleged defects in the petition’s identification of real parties in interest (RPI) to the … Continue reading

Posted in 315(b) One Year Bar, America Invents Act, Correction of Petition After Bar, estoppel, inter partes review, PTAB | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

In re Cuozzo Speed Technologies: Federal Circuit Affirms Board Finding of Unpatentability in First IPR

The Federal Circuit affirmed the final determination of the Board in the first inter partes review under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA).   Garmin petitioned for IPR of claims 10, 14 and 17 of U.S. Patent No. 6,778,074 owned by Cuozzo … Continue reading

Posted in America Invents Act, Broadest Reasonable Interpretation standard, claim challenges, Claim Construction, Federal Circuit, inter partes review, Mandamus Actions in the Federal Circuit, prior art, PTAB Patent Trials, reexamination generally | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

PTAB Joinder Practice Update: Board Interprets 35 U.S.C. § 315(c) to Require Party Joinder

Sep. 30, 2014 In at least two decisions last week, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) interpreted the IPR joinder provision, 35 U.S.C. § 315(c), to preclude a joinder request by an existing party to the proceeding.  The … Continue reading

Posted in 315(b) One Year Bar, claim challenges, Future of PTAB Trial Practice, inter partes review, Litigation, prior art, PTAB, PTAB Patent Trials | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment