USPTO Releases Study On Fintiv Denials
By Luke Cipolla*, Robby Breetz, and Josh Nightingale - The USPTO released a study in June 2022 that analyzed the prevalence of Fintiv denials occurring between January 1, 2019 and December 31, 2021. The Study focused on data illustrating how often patent owners...
IDS Initials Insufficient to Show Examiner Did Not Err
By Ibrahim Ijaz,* Evan Jones, and Matt Johnson - On July 6, 2022, a panel of three Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) administrative patent judges granted institution of inter partes review (“IPR”) in STMicroelectronics, Inc. v. Trustees of Purdue University. See...
Fed. Circ. Affirms PTAB Decisions Over Microphone IP
By Lauren Kim,* Jen Bachorik, and Matt Johnson - On June 1, 2022, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (“PTAB”) decisions in ClearOne, Inc. v. Shure Acquisition Holdings, Inc. regarding classification...
Section 285 Did Not Allow For IPR Fees
By Pranita Dhunghana* and Emily Tait - The Patent Act provides that “[t]he court in exceptional cases may award reasonable attorney fees to the prevailing party.” 35 U.S.C. § 285. In a recent denial of a motion for attorney fees pursuant to § 285, an Ohio district...
The Board Declines To Apply Interference Estoppel
By Ryan Camp,* Sachin Patel, and Josh Nightingale – On June 14, 2022, the Board instituted Zynga Inc.’s (“Zynga”) petition for IPR against U.S. Patent No. 7,168,089 (the “’089 patent”), rejecting Patent Owner IGT’s argument that interference estoppel should preclude...