PTAB Litigation Blog
  • Home
  • Cookie Policy
  • About
  • Advanced Topics
  • Contributors
  • Contacts
  • Design Patents
  • Discovery
  • District Court
  • Joinder
Select Page
Court of Federal Claims: Patents Are “Public Franchises, Not Private Property”

Court of Federal Claims: Patents Are “Public Franchises, Not Private Property”

by Emily Tait | Feb 6, 2019 | PTAB News

By Emily Tait Since April 2018 when the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its Oil States decision, patent owners have made various arguments addressing issues that were not resolved in that case.  One such example is Christy, Inc. v. United States, Case No. 1:18-cv-00657...
High Court to Tackle Whether Government Can Petition PTAB

High Court to Tackle Whether Government Can Petition PTAB

by Emily Tait | Nov 8, 2018 | Other News, PTAB Trial Basics

By: Emily Tait UPDATE: Oral Argument was held in this case in February 2019. On October 26, 2018, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Return Mail, Inc. v. United States Postal Service, et al. (17-1594) to address whether the U.S. government is a “person” who may...
A Truism that Once Again Bears Repeating: Don’t Wait Until the Last Minute

A Truism that Once Again Bears Repeating: Don’t Wait Until the Last Minute

by Emily Tait | Aug 24, 2018 | PTAB Trial Basics, Time Limits

By: Emily Tait A recent decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) denying a petition for inter partes review serves as a stark reminder of the oft-repeated truism, “don’t wait until the last minute.”  See VIZIO, Inc. v. ATI Techs. ULC, Case IPR2018-00560...
Is the Government a “Person” Who May Institute PTAB Trials?

Is the Government a “Person” Who May Institute PTAB Trials?

by Emily Tait | Jul 11, 2018 | Other News

By: Emily Tait and Lauren Willens UPDATE: In October, the Supreme Court granted the Petition in this case.   The America Invents Act (“AIA”) provides that a “[a] person may not file a petition for [covered business method review] unless the person or the person’s real...
Swearing Behind: Don’t Get Stuck in a Catch-22 of Corroboration

Swearing Behind: Don’t Get Stuck in a Catch-22 of Corroboration

by Emily Tait | May 28, 2018 | Federal Circuit Appeal, Prior Art Issues

By: Emily Tait The Federal Circuit’s recent decision in Apator Miitors ApS v. Kamstrump A/S, No. 2017-1681 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 17, 2018) (Moore, joined by Linn and Chen) serves as another reminder to sufficiently corroborate inventor testimony when attempting to swear...
« 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.