by Matthew Johnson | Nov 23, 2020 | Motions Practice, PTAB News
By Hannah Mehrle* and Matt Johnson – NeuMoDx Molecular, Inc., (Petitioner) who was otherwise barred from pursuing two IPR proceedings regarding patents owned by HandyLab, Inc. (Patent Owner) under 35 U.S.C. § 315(b)’s one year deadline, filed a Motion to Change...
by John Marlott | Dec 3, 2019 | Evidentiary Issues, Motions Practice
By John Marlott – While PTAB proceedings are ordinarily decided “on the papers,” in certain rare cases the Board will permit live witness testimony at the oral hearing. The Board’s precedential decision in K-40 v. Escort explains that “[t]he Board does not...
by Matthew Johnson | Aug 6, 2019 | Discovery, Motions Practice
By Jen Bachorik and Matt Johnson In a recent appeal of two inter partes review (“IPR”) decisions from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”), The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) held that the Board abused its discretion in denying VirnetX’s...
by Matthew Johnson | Jul 25, 2019 | Amendment Practice, Discovery, Joinder, Motions Practice, PTAB News
By Catharina Chin Eng and Matt Johnson Our prior post on the PTAB’s second update to the AIA Trial Practice Guide (TPG), published July 15, 2019, highlighted the additional guidance provided for petitions, patent owner preliminary responses and claim construction. ...
by Gasper LaRosa | Aug 22, 2018 | Evidentiary Issues, Motions Practice, Pharmaceutical
By: Mital B. Patel and Gasper J. LaRosa The PTAB recently granted a rare motion for additional discovery into the question of whether an unnamed party, Amneal Pharmaceuticals, LLC (“Amneal”), should have been named as a real-party-in-interest. In Kashiv LLC v. Purdue...
by Matthew Johnson | Jul 2, 2018 | Motions Practice
By: Matt Johnson, Josh Nightingale, and Grant Hebrank* The Patent Trial and Appeal Board held a Boardside Chat webinar on June 7, 2018, during which Administrative Patent Judges Justin T. Arbes and Kevin W. Cherry discussed motions to exclude and motions to strike in...
