PTAB Litigation Blog
  • Home
  • Cookie Policy
  • About
  • Advanced Topics
  • Contributors
  • Contacts
  • Design Patents
  • Discovery
  • District Court
  • Joinder
Select Page
PTAB Denial of Inter Partes Review under §325(d)

PTAB Denial of Inter Partes Review under §325(d)

by Matthew Johnson | Aug 18, 2023 | 325(d) issues, Prior Art Issues, PTAB News

By Mike Lavine, Aska Fujimori-Smith,* Jetta Cook, and Matt Johnson – The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB” or “Board”) recently denied inter partes review (IPR) of an electrocardiography monitor patent under 35 U.S.C. §325(d), finding that the same or...
Customer/Manufacturer Relationship Insufficient To Bar

Customer/Manufacturer Relationship Insufficient To Bar

by Matthew Johnson | Aug 16, 2023 | PTAB News, Real Party in Interest, Time Limits

By Alexandra Boeriu,* Hannah Mehrle and Matt Johnson – Recently, the PTAB held that Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. (“Petitioner”), met its burden in showing that a third party (the “Third Party”) was neither a real party-in-interest (“RPI”) nor in privity with...
Study Shows the Decline of Multiple Petitions for AIA Proceedings

Study Shows the Decline of Multiple Petitions for AIA Proceedings

by Carl Kukkonen | Aug 6, 2023 | Amendment Practice, PTAB News

By Carl Kukkonen – In an effort to shed light on the practice of filing multiple petitions under the America Invents Act (AIA) at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) recently released a detailed study....
Provisional Describes “Incompressible Solid” Despite Disclosure Of “Little” Compression

Provisional Describes “Incompressible Solid” Despite Disclosure Of “Little” Compression

by Albert Liou | Aug 1, 2023 | Prior Art Issues, PTAB News, Trial Institution

By Albert Liou – In a recent decision denying institution, the PTAB rejected Petitioner Mercedes Benz USA’s argument that the challenged patent was not entitled to the filing date of its provisional application.  Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC v. Westport Fuel Systems...
Fintiv Factor 3 Centers on Degree of Investment, Not Substantive Arguments

Fintiv Factor 3 Centers on Degree of Investment, Not Substantive Arguments

by Emily Tait | Aug 1, 2023 | PTAB News, Trial Institution

By Emily Tait and Adriane Elinski* – In a recent decision, the PTAB granted institution of an IPR despite multiple parallel district court proceedings involving the same patent, and flatly rejected the Patent Owner’s argument that the Petitioner’s “conflicting”...
Rosen-Durling Test Back on the Table

Rosen-Durling Test Back on the Table

by John Evans, Ph.D. | Aug 1, 2023 | Design Patents, PTAB News

By John Evans, Vishal Khatri, and Jesse Wynn – In February, the Federal Circuit declined to modify or overrule its long-standing test for obviousness in design patents, the Rosen-Durling test, despite arguments that the Supreme Court overruled it in KSR v....
« 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.