by David Maiorana | Oct 15, 2020 | PTAB Trial Basics, Standing
By Dave Maiorana – It is well-established that a counterclaim for invalidity in a district court litigation does not trigger the 35 U.S.C. § 315(a) bar. See 35 U.S.C. § 315(a)(3). See also our previous posts here and here discussing strategies for declaratory...
by Matthew Johnson | Jun 2, 2020 | Evidentiary Issues, PTAB News, PTAB Trial Basics, Trial Institution
By Christian Roberts* and Matt Johnson – On May 27, 2020, the USPTO announced a notice of proposed rulemaking that would affect IPR, PGR and CBM proceedings. Most significantly, the proposed rules would eliminate the presumption in favor of petitioners for...
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...
