PTAB Litigation Blog
  • Home
  • Cookie Policy
  • About
  • Advanced Topics
  • Contributors
  • Contacts
  • Design Patents
  • Discovery
  • District Court
  • Joinder
Select Page
“Known” Claim Elements Alone Insufficient for Motivation to Combine

“Known” Claim Elements Alone Insufficient for Motivation to Combine

by Matthew Johnson | Apr 19, 2024 | Federal Circuit Appeal, Prior Art Issues, PTAB News, PTAB Trial Basics

By Phil Shelton, Sue Gerber, and Matt Johnson – In a precedential opinion, the Federal Circuit reversed a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) decision in holding that certain claims of the Virtek patent (U.S. Patent No. 10,052,734) were unpatentable as...
Availability of Document on Government Website Insufficient for Institution

Availability of Document on Government Website Insufficient for Institution

by Lisa Furby | Apr 12, 2024 | Prior Art Issues, PTAB News, PTAB Trial Basics, Trial Institution

By Lisa Furby – In denying inter partes review in OBM, Inc. & Cholla Energy LLC v. Lancium LLC, the PTAB again made clear that “technical availability” of a reference is not enough to establish it is a printed publication.  Here, the PTAB held that the...
Federal Circuit Slices PTAB’s Printed Publication Finding

Federal Circuit Slices PTAB’s Printed Publication Finding

by Carl Kukkonen | Feb 28, 2024 | Evidentiary Issues, Prior Art Issues, PTAB News

By Jareli Reynoso Gutierrez and Carl Kukkonen – Recently, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed one and vacated another Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) final written decision in which the PTAB determined that Weber Inc. (“Weber”) failed to...
PRECEDENTIAL – Patent Appendix That Was Referenced, But Not Incorporated, Is Not Prior Art

PRECEDENTIAL – Patent Appendix That Was Referenced, But Not Incorporated, Is Not Prior Art

by Bill Devitt | Feb 1, 2024 | Petitions, Prior Art Issues, Trial Institution

By Connor Scholes, Owen Carpenter, Bill Devitt, and Dave Maiorana – In Apple Inc. v. DoDots Licensing Sols. LLC, IPR2023-00939, Paper 12 (PTAB Jan. 3, 2024) (“Decision”), the PTAB clarified what is and what is not part of the prior art, and as such what can be...
Undated Screenshot Insufficient to Prove Public Accessibility of GitHub Repository

Undated Screenshot Insufficient to Prove Public Accessibility of GitHub Repository

by Josh Nightingale | Jan 12, 2024 | Prior Art Issues, Trial Institution

By Justice Hubbard, Robby Breetz, and Josh Nightingale – In AO Kaspersky Lab v. Open Text Inc., the PTAB denied inter partes review after determining that a screenshot of a GitHub repository was insufficient to establish that a whitepaper posted to that...
Conception and Reduction to Practice Dates Matter

Conception and Reduction to Practice Dates Matter

by Matthew Johnson | Jan 2, 2024 | Prior Art Issues, PTAB News, PTAB Trial Basics

By Sabrina Bellantoni and Matt Johnson – In a recent decision, the Patent Trial and Appeals Board found that the disputed claims regarding transferring digital content were not unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) after determining that the prior art cited by...
« 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.