by David Cochran | May 29, 2018 | Claim Construction, PTAB Trial Basics
By: Sanjiv Laud and Dave Cochran The PTAB’s recent decision denying rehearing in United Microelectronics Corp. v. Lone Star Silicon Innovations LLC, IPR2017-01513, Paper 10 (PTAB May 22, 2018) sheds light on the Board’s practice under 37 C.F.R. 42.108(c), which holds...
by Matthew Johnson | May 23, 2018 | CBMs, Estoppel, Motions Practice, PTAB Trial Basics
By: Sue Gerber and Matt Johnson We recently reported some early observations about possible trends at the PTAB in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision in SAS Institute Inc. v. Iancu. See Observations: Three Weeks After Supreme Court’s SAS Institute Decision. On...
by Carl Kukkonen | May 14, 2018 | Motions Practice, PTAB Trial Basics
By: Stephanie Brooker and Carl Kukkonen The Patent Trial and Appeals Board (PTAB) recently denied a Motion to Dismiss asserting the presence of a conflict of interest of USPTO Director Andrei Iancu. In St. Jude Medical, LLC. v. Snyders Heart Valve LLC, the Patent...
by Matthew Johnson | May 4, 2018 | PTAB Trial Basics
By: Josh Nightingale and Matt Johnson On April 24, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in SAS Institute Inc. v. Iancu, holding that a decision to institute inter partes review under 35 U.S.C. § 314 may not institute on less all claims challenged in the...
by David Cochran | Apr 9, 2018 | Evidentiary Issues, PTAB Trial Basics
By: Rich Graham and Dave Cochran On April 2, 2018, the PTAB issued a final written decision in Fox Factory finding that the petitioner failed to carry its burden in showing the instituted claims were unpatentable as obvious. Fox Factory, Inc. v. SRAM, LLC,...
by Matthew Johnson | Mar 27, 2018 | Amendment Practice, PTAB Trial Basics
By: Josh Nightingale and Matthew Johnson In its en banc decision in Aqua Products, Inc. v. Matal, the Federal Circuit addressed the question of who bears the burden of proving that claims amended in IPR proceedings are or are not patentable. The decision, issued on...
