PTAB Litigation Blog
  • Home
  • Cookie Policy
  • About
  • Advanced Topics
  • Contributors
  • Contacts
  • Design Patents
  • Discovery
  • District Court
  • Joinder
Select Page
Supreme Court Holds Institution Time Bar Decisions Cannot Be Reviewed

Supreme Court Holds Institution Time Bar Decisions Cannot Be Reviewed

by Matthew Johnson | Apr 23, 2020 | Federal Circuit Appeal, PTAB News, Time Limits

By Sue Gerber and Matt Johnson – This week, the United States Supreme Court interpreted the scope of the AIA’s “no appeal” provision found in 35 U.S.C. § 314(d) (“Section 314(d)”).  Thryv, Inc. v. Click-to-Call Techs, L.P., No. 18-916, 2020 WL 1906544 (Apr. 20,...
JONES DAY TALKS®: PTAB Litigation Blog Reaches 500 Posts … and the PTAB Reacts to COVID-19

JONES DAY TALKS®: PTAB Litigation Blog Reaches 500 Posts … and the PTAB Reacts to COVID-19

by Matthew Johnson | Apr 22, 2020 | PTAB News

As Jones Day’s PTAB Litigation Blog marks its 500th posting, Dave Cochran and Matt Johnson discuss current patent litigation developments, near-term trends, and how the PTAB is handling cases during the COVID-19 lock down. You can listen...
BREAKING: Supreme Court Says PTAB Time Bar Unappealable

BREAKING: Supreme Court Says PTAB Time Bar Unappealable

by Matthew Johnson | Apr 21, 2020 | Federal Circuit Appeal, PTAB News, Time Limits

On Monday, the Supreme Court ruled that 35 U.S.C. § 314(d)’s statement that the “determination by the Director whether to institute an inter partes review under this section shall be final and nonappealable” means that PTAB decisions regarding the...
INFORMATIVE: Conference Paper Public Accessibility – Insufficient Proof

INFORMATIVE: Conference Paper Public Accessibility – Insufficient Proof

by Matthew Johnson | Apr 17, 2020 | Prior Art Issues, PTAB News

By Alex Li and Matt Johnson – As was previously noted here, the PTAB recently designated one decision as precedential and four as informative concerning the necessary showing for proving up a reference as printed publication prior art.  Here is an in depth...
Precedential: Declining To Use Discretion Under § 325(d) And § 314(a)

Precedential: Declining To Use Discretion Under § 325(d) And § 314(a)

by Matthew Johnson | Apr 10, 2020 | 325(d) issues, PTAB News

By Robby Breetz 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 the informative decision. On March 24, 2020,the PTAB designated two sections of the...
« 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.