PTAB Litigation Blog
  • Home
  • Cookie Policy
  • About
  • Advanced Topics
  • Contributors
  • Contacts
  • Design Patents
  • Discovery
  • District Court
  • Joinder
Select Page
Supreme Court Decides Not To Review PTAB Estoppel Issue

Supreme Court Decides Not To Review PTAB Estoppel Issue

by John Marlott | Jul 5, 2023 | Estoppel, Federal Circuit Appeal, PTAB News

By John Marlott and John Wright – The Supreme Court will not consider a challenge to the proper scope of AIA statutory estoppel, leaving the Federal Circuit’s governing interpretation in place. The Court’s June 26, 2023 order list denied the pending petition for...
Federal Circuit Clarifies Important IPR Estoppel Issues

Federal Circuit Clarifies Important IPR Estoppel Issues

by Josh Nightingale | May 5, 2023 | Estoppel, Federal Circuit

By Josh Nightingale – Under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2), a patent challenger in an inter partes review (IPR) that reaches a final written decision is estopped from arguing in a district court or the ITC that the challenged patent is invalid based on grounds that were...
Supreme Court Decides Not To Review PTAB Estoppel Issue

Supreme Court Requests Solicitor General’s Views On Important PTAB Estoppel Issue

by John Marlott | Mar 16, 2023 | Estoppel, Other News

By John Marlott and Sachin Patel* – What invalidity grounds is a petitioner barred from raising in parallel district court or ITC litigation after the petitioner previously challenged the patent and the PTAB has issued a final written decision?  The U.S. Supreme...
Director Vacates PTAB Adverse Judgments in Precedential Director Review

Director Vacates PTAB Adverse Judgments in Precedential Director Review

by Matthew Johnson | Feb 2, 2023 | Estoppel, PTAB News

By Misti Blount and Matt Johnson – Director Vidal’s sua sponte Director Review decision of Apple Inc. v. Zipit Wireless, Inc. (IPR2021-01124, -01125, -01126, -01129) was recently designated as precedential.  The decision dealt an immediate setback for Apple and...
Ex Parte Reexamination Barred Based on Earlier IPR

Ex Parte Reexamination Barred Based on Earlier IPR

by Josh Nightingale | Dec 5, 2022 | Estoppel, PTAB News

By Dhohyung Kim and Josh Nightingale – On November 16, 2022, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”) vacated a reexamination proceeding because the patent challenger relied on unpatentability grounds that reasonably could have been raised in an...
Petitioner Estopped On “Uninstituted” Claim

Petitioner Estopped On “Uninstituted” Claim

by Matthew Johnson | Oct 18, 2022 | Estoppel, PTAB News

By Hannah Mehrle and Matt Johnson – Click-to-Call (Plaintiff/Patent Owner) filed an infringement suit against Ingenio (Defendant/Petitioner) and others.  Defendant filed an IPR challenging the asserted claims.  In the IPR petition, Petitioner asserted multiple...
« 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.