by Matthew Johnson | Jun 28, 2024 | District Court, Estoppel, Federal Circuit, PTAB News
By Sabrina Bellantoni and Matt Johnson – Recently, District Court Judge Thomas S. Zilly in the Western District of Washington granted Ironburg Inventions Ltd.’s (“Ironburg”) motion for inter partes review (“IPR”) estoppelpursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2), which...
by Matthew Johnson | Apr 2, 2024 | District Court, PTAB News
By Daniel Sloan and Matt Johnson – The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) recently dismissed and terminated inter partes review challenging claims of U.S. Patent No. 8,495,167 (“the ’167 patent”). Netflix, Inc. v. Owner, IPR2022-01568, Paper 29 (PTAB March...
by Tom Ritchie | Jan 31, 2024 | District Court, Estoppel, PTAB News
By Tom Ritchie – In GeigTech East Bay v. Lutron Electronics, patent owner GeigTech argued that Lutron should be estopped under 35 U.S.C. § 325(e)(2) from asserting two prior art grounds that it said Lutron could have reasonably raised in its post-grant review...
by Carl Kukkonen | Dec 21, 2022 | Discovery, District Court, PTAB News
By Carl Kukkonen – The PTAB in a recent PGR proceeding: SWM International, LLC et al v. DynaEnergetics Europe GmbH (PGR2021-00097), reiterated the requirements for additional discovery. In particular, in this matter, the petitioner, having access to excerpts...
by John Evans, Ph.D. | Aug 26, 2022 | District Court, Estoppel, PTAB News
By Lisa Furby, John Evans, and Michelle Smit – After a final written decision issues, an IPR petitioner is statutorily estopped from going back to the district court and arguing that the same claims are “invalid on any ground that the petitioner raised or...
by Matthew Johnson | Jul 13, 2022 | Discovery, District Court, PTAB News
By Connor Scholes,* Evan Jones, and Matt Johnson – On May 3, 2022, a panel of three PTAB administrative patent judges granted a motion for additional discovery in TCL Industries Holdings Co., Ltd. v. Parkervision, Inc., IPR2021-00985, (PTAB 2022), in which the...
