-
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)
Author Archives: Tim Bianchi
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
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 appeal, Bianchi, CBM, covered business method, inter partes reexamination, inter partes review, IPR, litigation, motion to stay, patent claims, patent trial and appeal board, PGR, post-grant review, PTAB, Tim Bianchi
Leave a comment
PTAB Dismisses Three IPR Petitions Based on Sovereign Immunity
Covidien LP had a license to U.S. Patent 7,062,251, owned by the University of Florida Research Foundation (UFRF, Patent Owner). UFRF alleged breach of contract by Covidien, and sued Covidien in Florida state court for breach of license. Covidien counterclaimed … Continue reading
Posted in Adjudicative instead of examinatorial, inter partes review, States rights and sovereign immunity
Tagged appeal, Bianchi, CBM, federal circuit, inter partes review, IPR, issued patent, litigation, patent, patent trial and appeal board, PGR, post-grant review, PTAB, sovereign immunity, Tim Bianchi
Leave a comment
Patent Due Diligence and Evaluation After the AIA
Many factors must be considered for due diligence and valuation of a patent portfolio. The patent owner’s desire to have broad claims that capture a large number of infringements must be tempered against its need for claims that will not … Continue reading
Posted in America Invents Act, claim challenges, covered business methods, inter partes review, Litigation, Patent Portfolio Management, Patent Reform, Post Grant Review, Prosecution Guidelines, PTAB, PTAB Patent Trials
Tagged AIA, America Invents Act, Bianchi, CBM, IPR, patent due diligence, patent guidelines, Patent Infringement, patent litigation, patent prosecution, patent trial and appeal board, Patent Validity, PGR, post-grant proceedings, prior art, prior art search, prosecution guidelines, PTAB, Timothy Bianchi
Leave a comment
4 Tips to Make Your Patent Portfolio AIA-Ready
The America Invents Act (AIA) has changed the way that patents are enforced. In traditional patent litigation, a patent was drafted to perform in district court. After the AIA, when patents are asserted, they are first challenged in administrative proceedings … Continue reading
Posted in America Invents Act, claim challenges, covered business methods, inter partes review, Litigation, Post Grant Review, PTAB, PTAB Patent Trials
Tagged AIA, America Invents Act, Bianchi, CBM, covered business method patent review, inter partes review, IPR, litigation, patent litigation, patent portfolio, patent prosecution, patent reexamination, Patent Stay, PGR, post-grant review, prosecution guidelines, PTAB, reexamination
Leave a comment
Supreme Court’s Stryker/Halo Decision Makes it Easier for Courts to Award Enhanced Damages In Patent Infringement Cases
The recent Supreme Court decisions in the Stryker and Halo cases just made it easier for courts to award enhanced damages in patent infringement cases, discarding Seagate’s “objective recklessness” test. The Seagate Test In 2007, the Federal Circuit announced a test for enhanced … Continue reading
PTAB Relies on the Federal Circuit’s Recent § 101 Decision to Deny CBM Institution
On May 12, 2016, the Federal Circuit issued a decision on 101 patent eligibility that overturned a summary judgment finding of § 101 invalidity for software used for databases. Enfish, LLC v. Microsoft Corp., No. 2015-1244, 2016 WL 2756266 (Fed. Cir. … Continue reading
Posted in claim challenges, covered business methods, Federal Circuit, patent-eligible subject matter, Post Grant Review, PTAB, PTAB Patent Trials
Tagged Bianchi, Board, CBM, CBMR, covered business method, denial of institution, enfish v. microsoft, federal circuit, patent eligibility, patent trial and appeal board, PTAB, section 101, summary judgment, Tim Bianchi
Leave a comment