by Carl Kukkonen | Nov 16, 2020 | PTAB News
By Carl Kukkonen – A recent case in the Northern District of Illinois addressed the issue of collateral estoppel in connection with patents that were similar to those previously cancelled by the PTAB: In Think Prods., Inc. v. Acco Brands Corp., No....
by Matthew Johnson | Nov 5, 2020 | Joinder, PTAB News
By Matt Johnson – After being sued by Uniloc in April 2018 for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,467,088 (“Reconfiguration Manager for Controlling Upgrades of Electronic Devices”), Apple challenged claims 1-21 of that patent at the PTAB in October of that year...
by Matthew Johnson | Oct 30, 2020 | PTAB News, Time Limits
By Matt Johnson – Although infrequently awarded, district courts are empowered to issue sanctions for behavior at the PTAB that they deem “exceptional” under Octane Fitness. In Game and Technology Co., Ltd. v. Wargaming Group Limited, district court defendant and...
by Matthew Johnson | Oct 25, 2020 | PTAB News
By Matt Johnson – Total PTAB petitions remained flat in FY2020, with 1513 petitions total being filed: IPR (1429), PGR (64), and CBM (20), compared to 1464 in FY2019 and 1613 FY2018, down from 1901 in FY2017. September IPR petition filings were 4th highest for...
by Matthew Johnson | Oct 20, 2020 | 325(d) issues, PTAB News, Trial Institution
By Matt Johnson – The Supreme Court has held the PTAB’s “decision to deny a petition is a matter committed to the Patent Office’s discretion,” and that there is “no mandate to institute review.” Cuozzo Speed Techs., LLC v. Lee, 136 S. Ct. 2131, 2140 (2016). ...
by Matthew Johnson | Oct 13, 2020 | Federal Circuit Appeal, PTAB News
By Matt Johnson – On Tuesday, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in the three appeals from the Federal Circuit’s Arthrex decision, consolidating those three cases for briefing and argument. The questions to be presented are as follows: 1. Whether, for...
