PTAB Litigation Blog
  • Home
  • Cookie Policy
  • About
  • Advanced Topics
  • Contributors
  • Contacts
  • Design Patents
  • Discovery
  • District Court
  • Joinder
Select Page
Judges Removable-At-Will is Better than No PTAB At All

Judges Removable-At-Will is Better than No PTAB At All

by Matthew Johnson | Apr 8, 2020 | Federal Circuit Appeal, PTAB News

By Alex Li and Matt Johnson – On March 23, 2020, the Federal Circuit issued a per curiam order denying rehearing and rehearing en banc in Arthrex.  See Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., No. 18-2140, Order Denying Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc, Dkt....
Timing Of Arthrex Remands Remains Fuzzy

Timing Of Arthrex Remands Remains Fuzzy

by Matthew Johnson | Apr 7, 2020 | Federal Circuit Appeal, PTAB News

By Steph Brooker and Matt Johnson – The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) has denied the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO) unopposed motion to stay its mandate issued in Arthrex.  The USPTO filed its motion seeking a 90 day stay...
District Court Awards Fees After PTAB Cancels Claims

District Court Awards Fees After PTAB Cancels Claims

by Matthew Johnson | Apr 2, 2020 | PTAB News

By Alex Li and Matt Johnson – Patent litigation can be quite costly to defend against, that’s no secret.  But when can a prevailing defendant recover its attorneys’ fees from the plaintiff, patent holder, and under what circumstances?  Under the “American Rule,”...
Certain PTAB Due Dates Eligible for Extension Based on COVID-19 Delay

Certain PTAB Due Dates Eligible for Extension Based on COVID-19 Delay

by Matthew Johnson | Apr 1, 2020 | PTAB News

By Matt Johnson – On March 31, 2020, the Patent Office issued a Notice of Waiver of Patent-Related Timing Deadlines under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act) passed by Congress last week.  Under the due date modification authority...
Precedential: Two-Part Framework for Applying § 325(d)

Precedential: Two-Part Framework for Applying § 325(d)

by Matthew Johnson | Mar 31, 2020 | 325(d) issues, PTAB News

By Josh Nightingale and Matt Johnson – As we noted here, the PTAB recently designated two 35 U.S.C. § 325(d) cases precedential and one informative.  Here is an in depth review of a first of the precedential designated decisions. On March 24, 2020, the PTAB...
« 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.