by Carl Kukkonen | Jan 29, 2020 | Estoppel
By Phillip Shelton and Carl Kukkonen – In Think Prod., Inc. v. ACCO Brands Corp., No. 18-CV-07506, 2019 WL 6609427, at *1 (N.D. Ill. Dec. 5, 2019), the District Court addressed whether the plaintiff patent ower was collaterally estopped from arguing validity in...
by Carl Kukkonen | Nov 25, 2019 | Federal Circuit Appeal
By Austin Ball and Carl Kukkonen When patent owners appeal PTAB decisions to the Federal Circuit, 67% of subsequent opinions are one-line Federal Circuit Rule 36 (“Rule 36”) summary affirmance orders, but when petitioners appeal, that number is a mere 18%. Chestnut...
by Carl Kukkonen | Sep 17, 2019 | PTAB News, Time Limits
By Amanda Leckman and Carl Kukkonen On November 21, 2017, Petitioner Infiltrator Water Technologies, LLC, filed a Petition for inter partes review (IPR) of claims 8–12 of U.S. Patent No. 8,815,094 B2. In its Preliminary Response, filed on March 7, 2018, Patent Owner...
by Carl Kukkonen | Jul 22, 2019 | Evidentiary Issues, PTAB News
By Carl Kukkonen The PTAB panel in Focal Therapeutics, Inc. v. SenoRx, Inc., Case IPR2014-00116 (PTAB July 21, 2014) (Paper 19), provided certain clarifications with regard to the ability to confer with witnesses during examination. This clarification was in response...
by Carl Kukkonen | May 16, 2019 | Time Limits, Trial Institution
By Carl Kukkonen and Amanda Leckman The PTAB’s Precedential Opinion Panel (POP) will consider, at the behest of 360Heros, whether a complaint alleging patent infringement made by a party other than the patent owner of the patent triggers the § 315(b) time bar. 35...
