PTAB Litigation Blog
  • Home
  • Cookie Policy
  • About
  • Advanced Topics
  • Contributors
  • Contacts
  • Design Patents
  • Discovery
  • District Court
  • Joinder
Select Page
PTAB Applies Statutory Grace Period to Filing of Continuing Applications

PTAB Applies Statutory Grace Period to Filing of Continuing Applications

by Matthew Johnson | Sep 25, 2019 | Prior Art Issues

By Catharina Chin Eng and Matt Johnson The PTAB has previously applied to IPR filings the statutory grace period under 35 U.S.C. §  21(b) for USPTO papers and fees due on a weekend or holiday.  See Samsung Elecs. Co. v. Immersion Corp., Case IPR2018-01468, slip op. at...
Panel Including Director Iancu Institutes Unchallenged Petition for IPR

Panel Including Director Iancu Institutes Unchallenged Petition for IPR

by Matthew Johnson | Sep 19, 2019 | PTAB News, PTAB Trial Basics, Trial Institution

By Mike Lavine and Matt Johnson On September 6, 2019, a PTAB panel including USPTO Director Andrei Iancu instituted inter partes review (“IPR”) of U.S. Patent No. 9,279,259 (“the ‘259 Patent”).  The ‘259 Patent is directed to a tile lippage removal system and is owned...
Should You File A “Copycat” IPR Petition?

Should You File A “Copycat” IPR Petition?

by Matthew Johnson | Sep 16, 2019 | Joinder, Trial Institution

By Alex Li and Matt Johnson If you don’t have new grounds to add, you may as well copycat. On September 4, 2019, the PTAB denied Microsoft’s petition requesting inter partes review (“IPR”) of U.S. Patent No. 7,167,487 (“the ’487 patent”); furthermore, the panel also...
Jones Day’s PTAB Litigation Blog – The Story and Rationale

Jones Day’s PTAB Litigation Blog – The Story and Rationale

by Matthew Johnson | Sep 6, 2019 | Other News

Jones Day’s PTAB Litigation Blog launched August 19, 2015.  428 posts later, it has become one of the most widely recognized and read PTAB practice blogs in existence.  Jones Day partners Dave Cochran and Matt Johnson talk about the history and rationale for the...
IPR Time Bar Triggered Even If Party Serving Complaint Lacks Standing

IPR Time Bar Triggered Even If Party Serving Complaint Lacks Standing

by Matthew Johnson | Aug 27, 2019 | PTAB Trial Basics, Time Limits

By Tom Ritchie and Matt Johnson The PTAB Precedential Opinion Panel (“POP”) has concluded that the one-year time bar for filing an IPR petition under 35 U.S.C. § 315(b) is triggered by the service of a complaint alleging infringement even if “the serving party lacks...
« 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.