by Doug Pearson | Oct 31, 2018 | Pharmaceutical, PTAB News, PTAB Trial Basics
By Doug Pearson Prior to the USPTO’s issuance of revised Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) 2 on September 20, 2018 (available here), designation of Board decisions as Precedential or Informative required, among other things, nomination of a decision to the Chief...
by Matthew Johnson | Oct 30, 2018 | Pharmaceutical, PTAB News, PTAB Trial Basics
By Josh Nightingale and Matt Johnson The USPTO has revised its standard operating procedure (SOP) governing the assignment of judges to panels in Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) cases. The SOP, available here, provides guidance to Board administrative personnel...
by Tim Heverin | Oct 23, 2018 | PTAB Trial Basics
By Tim Heverin Finjan, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc., Case No. 17-cv-00072-BLF (N.D. Cal. Sept. 13, 2018), reminds us that representations to the PTAB can have consequences in district court litigation, even outside the estoppel context. In the patent infringement...
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...
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...
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)...
