by John Marlott | Apr 20, 2020 | Claim Construction, PTAB Trial Basics
By John Marlott – Means-plus-function claim limitations can present troublesome § 112 issues for IPR petitioners, and a recent PTAB decision further demonstrates how § 112 problems can derail an IPR petition. Samsung Electronics America, Inc. v. Uniloc 2017 LLC,...
by John Marlott | Apr 16, 2020 | PTAB Trial Basics, Standing
By John Marlott – While acknowledging an “apparent loophole” in the America Invents Act, a district court has permitted an accused-infringer-DJ-plaintiff to pursue counterclaims for patent invalidity—with no bar on later seeking an IPR at the PTAB. Epic Games,...
by Matthew Johnson | Feb 18, 2020 | Federal Circuit Appeal, PTAB Trial Basics
By Sue Gerber and Matt Johnson – The Federal Circuit’s recent decision in Samsung Electronics America, Inc. v. Prisua Engineering Corp., — F.3d —, 2020 WL 543427, at *4 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 4. 2020), could not be more clear: “[W]e hold that the Board may...
by Matthew Johnson | Jan 13, 2020 | PTAB Trial Basics
In November 2019, the United States Patent and Trademark Office published a second edition of the America Invents Act (AIA) Trial Practice Guide (Practice Guide) to incorporate the Practice Guide updates released in August 2018 and July 2019 into the original August...
by Matthew Johnson | Sep 27, 2019 | PTAB Trial Basics
The PTAB has been very active in designating decisions precedential and informative in 2019. Here’s a recap of designations so far: Real parties in interest, 35 U.S.C. §§ 312(a)(2), 322(a)(2) Precedential – Adello Biologics LLC v. Amgen Inc., Case...
by Matthew Johnson | Sep 19, 2019 | PTAB News, PTAB Trial Basics, Trial Institution
By Mike Lavine and Matt Johnson On September 6, 2019, a PTAB panel including USPTO Director Andrei Iancu instituted inter partes review (“IPR”) of U.S. Patent No. 9,279,259 (“the ‘259 Patent”). The ‘259 Patent is directed to a tile lippage removal system and is owned...
