PTAB Litigation Blog
  • Home
  • Cookie Policy
  • About
  • Advanced Topics
  • Contributors
  • Contacts
  • Design Patents
  • Discovery
  • District Court
  • Joinder
Select Page
Section 316(a)(11) Time Limits Do Not Apply Beyond First FWD

Section 316(a)(11) Time Limits Do Not Apply Beyond First FWD

by Matthew Johnson | May 18, 2022 | Final Written Decisions, Time Limits

By Haytham Soliman and Matt Johnson – In Laboratoire Francais du Fractionnement et des Biotechnologies S.A. v. Novo Nordisk Healthcare AG, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) denied the Petitioner’s motion to terminate the inter partes review (IPR) and to...
RPI: Not Quite a Jurisdictional Requirement

RPI: Not Quite a Jurisdictional Requirement

by Matthew Johnson | Mar 2, 2022 | Real Party in Interest, Time Limits

By Mike Lavine, Matt Chung, and Matt Johnson – Recently, the Patent Trial and Appeals Board (PTAB) declined to terminate an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding despite the Petitioner’s alleged failure to identify all the real parties-in-interest (RPIs). Unified...
FedEx Delivery Sufficiently Akin to Priority Mail Express for Petition Service

FedEx Delivery Sufficiently Akin to Priority Mail Express for Petition Service

by Matthew Johnson | Apr 7, 2021 | CBMs, Time Limits

By Hannah Mehrle and Matt Johnson – A PTAB panel found FedEx sufficiently akin to Priority Mail Express to meet the petition service rule, and to the extent necessary further waived the regulatory requirements related to the timing of Petitioner’s (TIZ Inc....
District Court Issues Sanctions for Patent Owner’s Shapeshifting Arguments at the PTAB

District Court Issues Sanctions for Patent Owner’s Shapeshifting Arguments at the PTAB

by Matthew Johnson | Oct 30, 2020 | PTAB News, Time Limits

By Matt Johnson – Although infrequently awarded, district courts are empowered to issue sanctions for behavior at the PTAB that they deem “exceptional” under Octane Fitness.  In Game and Technology Co., Ltd. v. Wargaming Group Limited, district court defendant and...
PTAB Reconsiders Unappealable § 315(b) Issue On Remand

PTAB Reconsiders Unappealable § 315(b) Issue On Remand

by Matthew Johnson | Oct 2, 2020 | Federal Circuit Appeal, Time Limits

By Matt Johnson – Current PTAB-relevant case law dictates: 35 U.S.C. § 315(b) “unambiguously precludes the Director from instituting an IPR if the petition seeking institution is filed more than one year after the petitioner, real party in interest, or privy of...
A Dissenting Opinion On Weighing The Fintiv Factors

A Dissenting Opinion On Weighing The Fintiv Factors

by Tom Ritchie | Jun 11, 2020 | Time Limits, Trial Institution

By Tom Ritchie – The PTAB has explained that it has discretion to deny an IPR petition even if the petitioner has shown that it meets the statutory threshold for institution, which requires “that there is a reasonable likelihood that the petitioner would prevail...
« Older Entries

About this blog

Follow us on Twitter

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
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • 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.