PTAB Litigation Blog
  • Home
  • Cookie Policy
  • About
  • Advanced Topics
  • Contributors
  • Contacts
  • Design Patents
  • Discovery
  • District Court
  • Joinder
Select Page
PTAB Denies Joinder Motion Filed More Than One Month After PGR Institution

PTAB Denies Joinder Motion Filed More Than One Month After PGR Institution

by Matthew Johnson | Apr 6, 2022 | Joinder, PGR, Trial Institution

By Christian Roberts and Matt Johnson – Typically, a Motion for Joinder to an earlier post-grant review (“PGR”) must be filed within one month of the institution of the earlier PGR.  37 C.F.R. § 42.222(b).  While the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) does...
Petition Survives Word Count Complaint And Request for Withdrawal

Petition Survives Word Count Complaint And Request for Withdrawal

by Matthew Johnson | Apr 1, 2022 | PTAB Trial Basics, Trial Institution

By Akosua Kyereme-Tuah, Mike Lavine, and Matt Johnson – The PTAB recently denied a motion to dismiss a Revised Petition and terminate an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding despite Petitioner’s alleged withdrawal of the Original Petition and failure to comply...
Joinder Denied For Petitioner Whose Invalidity Case Was Dismissed With Prejudice

Joinder Denied For Petitioner Whose Invalidity Case Was Dismissed With Prejudice

by Matthew Johnson | Mar 30, 2022 | Joinder, PTAB News

By Sue Gerber and Matt Johnson – In the PTAB’s recent decision in Code 200 v. Bright Data Ltd., IPR2021-01503, Paper No. 13 (PTAB Mar. 14, 2022), the PTAB expounded upon the circumstances in which joinder of a “me-too” case under § 315(b) was not warranted.  In...
PTAB Does Not Provide a Supplemental Discovery Venue

PTAB Does Not Provide a Supplemental Discovery Venue

by Matthew Johnson | Mar 10, 2022 | Discovery, PTAB News

By Nick Bagnolo and Matt Johnson – Following the grant of institution of a recent IPR petition in the matter of Satco Products, Inc. v. The Regents of the University of California, IPR2021-00662, Paper 26 (PTAB Feb. 11, 2022) concerning U.S. Patent No....
RPI: Not Quite a Jurisdictional Requirement

RPI: Not Quite a Jurisdictional Requirement

by Matthew Johnson | Mar 2, 2022 | Real Party in Interest, Time Limits

By Mike Lavine, Matt Chung, and Matt Johnson – Recently, the Patent Trial and Appeals Board (PTAB) declined to terminate an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding despite the Petitioner’s alleged failure to identify all the real parties-in-interest (RPIs). Unified...
« 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.