by Anthony Insogna | Jul 8, 2025 | PTAB News, PTAB Trial Basics, Trial Institution
By Anthony Insogna, Sarah Geers, Matt Hertko, Andrea Jeffries, Gasper LaRosa, Jason Winchester, and Matt Johnson – The Situation: Under a new U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) policy issued in March 2025, pre-institution inter partes review...
by S. Christian Platt | Jun 10, 2025 | PTAB News, PTAB Trial Basics, Stay, Trial Institution
By Sabrina Bellantoni & S. Christian Platt – The Patent Trial and Appeals Board (“PTAB”) recently denied institution of an inter partes review (“IPR”), exercising its discretion under 35 U.S.C. § 314(a) and Apple Inc. v. Fintiv Inc., IPR2020-00019 (PTAB Mar....
by Matthew Johnson | Jun 6, 2025 | PTAB News, PTAB Trial Basics, Trial Institution
By Matt Johnson – The PTAB has published its monthly statistics wrap up for April 2025. As expected, those statistics show a significant decline in the institution rate compared to the first six months of the fiscal year. In those first six months, the overall...
by Matthew Johnson | May 23, 2025 | Discovery, PTAB News, PTAB Trial Basics, Time Limits
By Daniel Sloan and Matt Johnson – USPTO Acting Director Coke Morgan Stewart recently vacated and remanded three Final Written Decisions from the PTAB. Semiconductor Components Indus. v. Greenthread, LLC, IPR2023-01242, IPR2023-01243, IPR2023-01244, Paper 94...
by Matthew Johnson | May 21, 2025 | Estoppel, PTAB News, PTAB Trial Basics
By Evan Tassis and Matt Johnson – Recently, an ITC Administrative Law Judge applied IPR statutory estoppel under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2) in denying a Respondent’s motion for summary determination of invalidity in Certain Audio Players and Components Thereof,...
by Matthew Johnson | May 15, 2025 | Estoppel, Prior Art Issues, PTAB News, PTAB Trial Basics
By Omar Jishi and Matt Johnson – In IOENGINE, LLC v. Ingenico Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2025), the Federal Circuit narrowed the scope of IPR estoppel under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2), which precludes an IPR petitioner from asserting in court that a patent claim “is invalid on...
