by Matthew Johnson | Oct 28, 2019 | Trial Institution
By Tom Ritchie and Matt Johnson The status of a parallel district court proceeding may provide a basis for the PTAB to deny institution of an IPR pursuant to § 314(a). NHK Spring Co. v. Intri-Plex Techs., Inc., IPR2018-00752, Paper 8 (PTAB Sep. 12, 2018)...
by Matthew Johnson | Oct 16, 2019 | Trial Institution
By: Yury Kalish and Vishal Khatri – Since their inception as part of the AIA, inter partes reviews (IPRs) have been a favorite tool in the arsenal of patent challengers. Their statutorily mandated 18-month schedule oftentimes allows the PTAB to resolve a question of...
by Matthew Johnson | Oct 11, 2019 | Time Limits
By Sue Gerber and Matt Johnson Last year, this blog discussed various strategic considerations for litigants seeking declarations of invalidity in district court actions to avoid being precluded from also seeking inter partes or other post-grant review before the...
by Matthew Johnson | Sep 27, 2019 | PTAB Trial Basics
The PTAB has been very active in designating decisions precedential and informative in 2019. Here’s a recap of designations so far: Real parties in interest, 35 U.S.C. §§ 312(a)(2), 322(a)(2) Precedential – Adello Biologics LLC v. Amgen Inc., Case...
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...
