by Matthew Johnson | Jun 10, 2022 | Final Written Decisions, PTAB News, Request for Reconsideration
By Ben Baek,* Mike Lavine, and Matt Johnson – In a previous post from July 2021, we discussed the interim process for Director review in PTAB proceedings post-Arthrex. Since then, only three out of over 175 requests for Director review of a Final Written...
by David Maiorana | Feb 15, 2022 | Request for Reconsideration, Trial Institution
By David Linden and Dave Maiorana – In November 2020, Google LLC filed two petitions requesting an inter partes review of the claims of Ikorongo Technology LLC (“Ikorongo”) owned U.S. Patent No. 8,874,554 (“the ’554 patent”). Separate petitions were filed to...
by Joseph Beauchamp | Dec 14, 2021 | PTAB News, Request for Reconsideration
By Alison Ibendahl and Joe Beauchamp – In a recent decision, Commissioner Andrew Hirschfeld, who is currently performing the functions and duties of the Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the USPTO, issued the first...
by Matthew Johnson | Nov 19, 2020 | PTAB News, Request for Reconsideration
By Matt Johnson – The PTAB has added an online form to the USPTO website that allows the submission of an amicus request addressing a pending request for Precedential Opinion Panel (POP) review. This form will enable interested parties to provide fast input on...
by Matthew Johnson | Apr 9, 2020 | Federal Circuit Appeal, PTAB News, Request for Reconsideration
By Mike Lavine and Matt Johnson – On March 30, 2020, the Federal Circuit relied on Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., 941 F.3d 1320 (Fed. Cir. 2019) to vacate and remand several related PTAB decisions, including in proceedings where the patent owner did...
by Matthew Johnson | Feb 14, 2020 | Amendment Practice, Request for Reconsideration
By Levent Herguner and Matt Johnson – In a recent decision, the PTAB admitted that it erred in its prior determination of unpatentability, and authorized supplemental briefing on the patentability of substitute claims. See Rimfrost AS v. Aker Biomarine...
