PTAB Litigation Blog
  • Home
  • Cookie Policy
  • About
  • Advanced Topics
  • Contributors
  • Contacts
  • Design Patents
  • Discovery
  • District Court
  • Joinder
Select Page
Patent Need Not Be Valid To Be 102(e)(pre-AIA) Prior Art

Patent Need Not Be Valid To Be 102(e)(pre-AIA) Prior Art

by Matthew Johnson | Jul 14, 2021 | Prior Art Issues

By Sue Gerber and Matt Johnson – This blog has previously discussed the Federal Circuit’s decision in Becton, Dickinson and Co. v. Baxter Corp. Englewood, — F.3d —, No. 2020-1937, 2021 WL 2176796 (Fed. Cir. May 28, 2021).  See Telepharma Disconnect: ...
From Respiratory Care to Power Plants: The PTAB on Analogous Art

From Respiratory Care to Power Plants: The PTAB on Analogous Art

by Albert Liou | Apr 12, 2021 | Prior Art Issues

By Albert Liou and Jen Bachorik – We recently wrote about the Federal Circuit’s 2020 decision in Donner Technology, LLC. v. Pro Stage Gear, LLC, where the Federal Circuit vacated the PTAB’s denial of an obviousness challenge due to its finding that the prior art...
Book As A Printed Publication? Read Carefully.

Book As A Printed Publication? Read Carefully.

by Matthew Johnson | Dec 16, 2020 | Prior Art Issues

By Sachin Patel* and Matt Johnson – Be careful not to confuse reprints with new editions when considering books as printed publications under 35 U.S.C. 102(b). In VidStream LLC v. Twitter, Inc., No. 2019-1734, 2020 WL 6937852 (Nov. 25, 2020), the Federal Circuit...
Listserv Working Group Reference Not A Printed Publication

Listserv Working Group Reference Not A Printed Publication

by Matthew Johnson | Dec 3, 2020 | Prior Art Issues

By Ana Teixeira* and Matt Johnson – “Printed publication” under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) is typically construed to encompass any type of document, as long as the document is “publicly accessible.”  See, e.g., Medtronic, Inc. v. Barry, 891 F.3d 1368 (Fed. Cir. 2018)....
Fed. Circuit Cautions Against Narrow Application of Analogous Art Test

Fed. Circuit Cautions Against Narrow Application of Analogous Art Test

by Matthew Johnson | Nov 11, 2020 | Prior Art Issues

By Matt Johnson – One of the steps in a proper obviousness analysis is to ascertain the scope and content of the prior art and the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.  Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kan. City, 383 U.S. 1, 17 (1966).  The...
PTAB Issues Guidance With Regard to AAPA

PTAB Issues Guidance With Regard to AAPA

by Carl Kukkonen | Nov 6, 2020 | Prior Art Issues

By Carl Kukkonen – On August 18, 2020, the USPTO issued guidance regarding the reliance on Applicant Admitted prior art (AAPA).  Under 35 U.S.C. § 311(b), IPRs may be instituted only “on the basis of prior art consisting of patents or printed...
« 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.