PTAB Litigation Blog
  • Home
  • Cookie Policy
  • About
  • Advanced Topics
  • Contributors
  • Contacts
  • Design Patents
  • Discovery
  • District Court
  • Joinder
Select Page
Speculation Insufficient To Justify Routine Discovery

Speculation Insufficient To Justify Routine Discovery

by Matthew Johnson | Oct 19, 2018 | Discovery, PTAB Trial Basics

By Sue Gerber and Matt Johnson The PTAB has discretion to permit “routine discovery” under 37 C.F.R. §42.51(b)(1)(iii) when that discovery “is narrowly directed to specific information known to the responding party to be inconsistent with a position advanced by that...
PTAB Denies Institution Of Follow-On Petition From Similarly Situated Defendant

PTAB Denies Institution Of Follow-On Petition From Similarly Situated Defendant

by Matthew Johnson | Sep 10, 2018 | PTAB Trial Basics

By: Tom Ritchie and Matt Johnson In Shenzhen Silver Star Intelligent Tech. v. iRobot Corp., IPR2018-00761, Paper 15 (PTAB Sept. 5, 2018), the PTAB denied institution of Shenzhen Silver Star’s IPR petition in view of an earlier challenge to the same patent by a...
Petitioners Be Mindful Of Decisions In Related IPRs

Petitioners Be Mindful Of Decisions In Related IPRs

by Matthew Johnson | Sep 3, 2018 | PTAB Trial Basics

By: Susan M. Gerber and Matt Johnson In a recent PTAB decision, Petitioners learned the importance of addressing decisions from related IPRs when making arguments before the PTAB.  Apple, Inc. and FitBit, Inc. v. Valencell, Inc., Case IPR2017-00319 (PTAB Aug. 6, 2018)...
Petitioner’s Reply May Expand Presented Arguments and Address New Claim Constructions

Petitioner’s Reply May Expand Presented Arguments and Address New Claim Constructions

by David Cochran | Aug 31, 2018 | Federal Circuit, PTAB Trial Basics

By: David Anderson and Dave Cochran On August 27, 2018, the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded the PTAB’s finding that claims 1-3, 6-9, and 12-14 of U.S. Patent No. 5,602,831 (“the ’831 Patent”) are not unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103.  See Ericsson Inc. v....
A Truism that Once Again Bears Repeating: Don’t Wait Until the Last Minute

A Truism that Once Again Bears Repeating: Don’t Wait Until the Last Minute

by Emily Tait | Aug 24, 2018 | PTAB Trial Basics, Time Limits

By: Emily Tait A recent decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) denying a petition for inter partes review serves as a stark reminder of the oft-repeated truism, “don’t wait until the last minute.”  See VIZIO, Inc. v. ATI Techs. ULC, Case IPR2018-00560...
Practical Tips from the Judges’ Panel at the PTAB Judicial Conference

Practical Tips from the Judges’ Panel at the PTAB Judicial Conference

by S. Christian Platt | Aug 2, 2018 | PTAB News, PTAB Trial Basics

By: S. Christian Platt and Michael Lavine On July 26, 2018, the Silicon Valley Regional Office of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) hosted a Judicial Conference by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”).  During the conference, a panel of...
« 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.