PTAB Litigation Blog
  • Home
  • Cookie Policy
  • About
  • Advanced Topics
  • Contributors
  • Contacts
  • Design Patents
  • Discovery
  • District Court
  • Joinder
Select Page
Patent Owner Sanctioned For Ex Parte Communications

Patent Owner Sanctioned For Ex Parte Communications

by David Maiorana | Jan 9, 2019 | PTAB News, Request for Reconsideration

By Dave Maiorana Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.5(d), communications with a Board member regarding a specific proceeding are not permitted “unless both parties have an opportunity to be involved in the communication.”  This prohibition, however, does not extend to “referring to...
ITC Blog: ITC Provides a Way to Work Around IPR Estoppel

ITC Blog: ITC Provides a Way to Work Around IPR Estoppel

by David Maiorana | Nov 19, 2018 | Estoppel

By: David Maiorana  In In re Certain Magnetic Tape Cartridges and Components Thereof, 337-TA-1058 (ITC October 2, 2018, Order), Administrative Law Judge Cheney ruled that even if a respondent is estopped from raising certain invalidity challenges because it failed to...
Intervening Court Decisions May Prevent Denial of Review Under § 325(d)

Intervening Court Decisions May Prevent Denial of Review Under § 325(d)

by David Maiorana | Nov 16, 2018 | 325(d) issues, CBMs

By Kait Crowder and Dave Maiorana Under 35 U.S.C. § 325(d), the PTAB has discretion regarding whether to institute a covered business method review if the arguments presented in the petition are the same, or substantially the same, as those previously considered by...
Clarified: Standing Requirements and Burden Shifting Framework in IPR Proceedings

Clarified: Standing Requirements and Burden Shifting Framework in IPR Proceedings

by David Maiorana | Sep 21, 2018 | Federal Circuit Appeal, Prior Art Issues, Uncategorized

By: Kaitlin Crowder and Dave Maiorana Any person or entity may file an IPR proceeding to invalidate a patent, regardless of whether it faces a specific threat of infringement.  An adverse decision in an IPR proceeding is appealable only to the Federal Circuit. ...
Relevant Public, Not General Public, When Determining Availability of Printed Publication

Relevant Public, Not General Public, When Determining Availability of Printed Publication

by David Maiorana | Aug 9, 2018 | Federal Circuit Appeal, Prior Art Issues

By: David Anderson and Dave Maiorana On July 27, 2018, the Federal Circuit reversed the PTAB’s finding that Petitioner GoPro, Inc. failed to establish the public availability of an alleged prior art printed publication.  GoPro, Inc. v. Contour IP Holding LLC, __ F....
« 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.