PTAB Litigation Blog
  • Home
  • Cookie Policy
  • About
  • Advanced Topics
  • Contributors
  • Contacts
  • Design Patents
  • Discovery
  • District Court
  • Joinder
Select Page
Higher Burden of Demonstrating Public Accessibility of a Reference at Final Decision Stage

Higher Burden of Demonstrating Public Accessibility of a Reference at Final Decision Stage

by Jennifer Chheda, Ph.D. | May 13, 2024 | Final Written Decisions, Prior Art Issues, PTAB News, Request for Reconsideration

By Jennifer Chheda and Daniel Sloan – In denying Petitioner Medivis, Inc.’s (“Medivis”) Request for Rehearing of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (“PTAB”) Final Written Decision (“FWD”) in Medivis, Inc. v. Novarad Corp. inter partes review, the PTAB found...
Institution Denial Vacated to Reconsider Prior Art Drawing

Institution Denial Vacated to Reconsider Prior Art Drawing

by Matthew Johnson | May 10, 2024 | Prior Art Issues, Request for Reconsideration

By Jen Bachorik and Matt Johnson – On April 5, 2024, Director Vidal vacated and remanded the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB’s) denial of institution of inter partes review (IPR) where the Petitioner relied on a drawing in a prior art patent document to...
PTAB Announces Rules Formalizing Director Review

PTAB Announces Rules Formalizing Director Review

by Matthew Johnson | Apr 26, 2024 | PTAB News, PTAB Trial Basics, Request for Reconsideration

By: Lisa Furby, Marlee Hartenstein, Stephanie M. Mishaga and Robby Breetz – In 2021, following the Supreme Court’s Arthrex decision, the PTO issued an interim procedure for requesting Director Review (discussed here).  The PTO has now issued a Notice of Proposed...
When Might a PTAB Rehearing Be Granted?

When Might a PTAB Rehearing Be Granted?

by Matthew Johnson | Feb 21, 2024 | PTAB News, Request for Reconsideration

By Sabrina Bellantoni and Matt Johnson – Recently, the Patent Trial and Appeals Board (“PTAB”) granted a request for rehearing of a decision that denied an institution of inter partes review and then instituted a trial on all the challenged claims on all the...
Penumbra Illuminates Priority Dates Pre and Post-AIA

Penumbra Illuminates Priority Dates Pre and Post-AIA

by Sarah Geers | Dec 28, 2023 | Prior Art Issues, PTAB News, Request for Reconsideration

By Luke Cipolla, Daniel Sloan, Robert Breetz, Sarah Geers, and Matt Johnson – USPTO Director Kathi Vidal recently designated precedential section II.E.3 of Penumbra, Inc. v. RapidPulse, Inc. and clarified that the priority analysis for an AIA reference patent as...
USPTO Director Orders Rehearing Panel Review of Second Denied IPR

USPTO Director Orders Rehearing Panel Review of Second Denied IPR

by Carl Kukkonen | Dec 14, 2023 | PTAB News, PTAB Trial Basics, Request for Reconsideration, Trial Institution

By Ben Baek* and Carl Kukkonen – On November 16, 2023, USPTO Director Kathi Vidal ordered a Delegated Rehearing Panel (“DRP”) to review whether the PTAB misapprehended or overlooked certain issues when denying challenger SynAffix B.V.’s petition for inter partes...
« 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.