PTAB Litigation Blog
  • Home
  • Cookie Policy
  • About
  • Advanced Topics
  • Contributors
  • Contacts
  • Design Patents
  • Discovery
  • District Court
  • Joinder
Select Page
PTAB Institutes IPR on Compelling Merits, Despite Other Fintiv Factors Favoring Denial

PTAB Institutes IPR on Compelling Merits, Despite Other Fintiv Factors Favoring Denial

by David Maiorana | Jun 26, 2024 | PTAB News, Trial Institution

By David Linden and Dave Maiorana – On October 27, 2023, Inergy Technology, Inc. (“Inergy”) filed concurrent petitions for inter partes review (“IPR”) of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,629,634 (“the ’634 Patent”) (“IPR093”) and 7,812,409 (“the ’409 Patent”) (“IPR094”), each...
Petition Denied for Lacking Section 112(f) Construction and Fintiv

Petition Denied for Lacking Section 112(f) Construction and Fintiv

by David Maiorana | Apr 11, 2024 | Claim Construction, PTAB News, PTAB Trial Basics, Trial Institution

By Luke Cipolla and Dave Maiorana – On March 7, 2024, the PTAB denied institution in 10x Genomics, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, IPR2023-01299, Paper 15 (PTAB Mar. 7, 2024) (“Decision”). The PTAB denied institution on two separate grounds:...
Supreme Court Denies Petition Arguing for Preclusive Effects of PTAB Decisions Pending Appeal

Supreme Court Denies Petition Arguing for Preclusive Effects of PTAB Decisions Pending Appeal

by David Maiorana | Mar 1, 2024 | Federal Circuit Appeal, Final Written Decisions, PTAB News, PTAB Trial Basics

By Luke Cipolla and Dave Maiorana – On February 20, 2024, the Supreme Court denied Liquidia Technologies’ petition for a writ of certiorari to review a precedential Federal Circuit decision, United Therapeutics Corp. v. Liquidia Techs., Inc., 74 F.4th 1360 (Fed....
Narrow Stipulation Results in Fintiv Denial

Narrow Stipulation Results in Fintiv Denial

by David Maiorana | Nov 21, 2023 | PTAB News, PTAB Trial Basics, Trial Institution

By David Linden and Dave Maiorana – On March 31, 2023, Zhuhai CosMX Battery Co., Ltd. (“Zhuhai”) filed a petition for inter partes review (“IPR”) of claims of U.S. Patent No. 11,329,352 (“the ’352 Patent”), assigned to Ningde Amperex Technology Ltd....
PTAB Not Required to Decode Petitioner Arguments

PTAB Not Required to Decode Petitioner Arguments

by David Maiorana | Nov 16, 2023 | Federal Circuit, Federal Circuit Appeal, PTAB News

By Dave Maiorana and Megan McKnelly – In a precedential opinion, the Federal Circuit affirmed two Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) patentability decisions, holding that the PTAB did not abuse its discretion by not addressing arguments not clearly presented...
« Older Entries
Next Entries »

About this blog

Categories

  • 325(d) issues
  • Amendment Practice
  • CBMs
  • Claim Construction
  • Design Patents
  • Discovery
  • District Court
  • Estoppel
  • Evidentiary Issues
  • Expert Witnesses
  • Federal Circuit
  • Federal Circuit Appeal
  • Final Written Decisions
  • Joinder
  • Motions Practice
  • Other News
  • Patent Eligible Subject Matter
  • Petitions
  • PGR
  • Pharmaceutical
  • Preliminary Responses
  • Prior Art Issues
  • PTAB News
  • PTAB Trial Basics
  • Real Party in Interest
  • Request for Reconsideration
  • Standing
  • Stay
  • Time Limits
  • Trial Institution
  • Uncategorized

Archives

Links

www.jonesday.com

About Jones Day's Intellectual Property Practice

Subscribe to Jones Day publications

    • Privacy
    • X
    • RSS

    The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Jones Day or its clients. The posts and information provided are for general information purposes and are not intended to be and should not be taken as legal advice.