PTAB Litigation Blog
  • Home
  • Cookie Policy
  • About
  • Advanced Topics
  • Contributors
  • Contacts
  • Design Patents
  • Discovery
  • District Court
  • Joinder
Select Page
Reverse Engineered Search Insufficient For IPR/PGR Estoppel

Reverse Engineered Search Insufficient For IPR/PGR Estoppel

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...
“Eleventh Hour” Sotera Stipulation Sufficient to Avoid Denial

“Eleventh Hour” Sotera Stipulation Sufficient to Avoid Denial

by Josh Nightingale | Jan 23, 2024 | Petitions, PTAB News, Trial Institution

By Daniel Sloan and Josh Nightingale – The PTAB recently declined to exercise its discretion to deny IPR, instituting review in BMW of North America, LLC v. NorthStar Systems LLC, IPR2023-01017, Paper 12 (Dec. 8, 2023).  There, the PTAB held that (1) a Sotera...
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...
Penumbra Illuminates Priority Dates Pre and Post-AIA

Penumbra Illuminates Priority Dates Pre and Post-AIA

by Sarah Geers | Dec 28, 2023 | Prior Art Issues, PTAB News, Request for Reconsideration

By Luke Cipolla, Daniel Sloan, Robert Breetz, Sarah Geers, and Matt Johnson – USPTO Director Kathi Vidal recently designated precedential section II.E.3 of Penumbra, Inc. v. RapidPulse, Inc. and clarified that the priority analysis for an AIA reference patent as...
Statutory Disclaimer After Petition Bars Institution

Statutory Disclaimer After Petition Bars Institution

by Matthew Johnson | Dec 22, 2023 | Prior Art Issues, PTAB News, Trial Institution

By Hannah Mehrle and Matt Johnson – In IPR2023-01058, the PTAB declined to institute IPR, finding that Patent Owner had disclaimed all challenged claims under 35 U.S.C. § 243(a), in compliance with 37 C.F.R. § 1.321(a), such that there was no basis on which to...
Proceed With Caution When Using Wayback Machine® Prior Art

Proceed With Caution When Using Wayback Machine® Prior Art

by John Marlott | Dec 18, 2023 | Evidentiary Issues, PTAB News, PTAB Trial Basics

By John Marlott – Just because a document is archived on the Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine® does not necessarily qualify it as prior art for an IPR challenge. What is the Wayback Machine®?  The USPTO describes it this way: The Wayback Machine® is a digital...
« 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.