by David Maiorana | Mar 25, 2021 | Federal Circuit Appeal, Trial Institution, Uncategorized
By Robby Breetz and Dave Maiorana – In Mylan Labs Ltd. v. Janssen Pharmaceutica N.V., the Federal Circuit reaffirmed it lacked jurisdiction over appeals from the PTAB denying IPR institution, noted that it had jurisdiction over requests for mandamus, but that...
by Matthew Johnson | Mar 25, 2021 | PTAB News, Trial Institution
Partners Matt Johnson and Sarah Geers talk about former USPTO Director Andrei Iancu’s impact on the PTAB, and what we might expect from a new director under the Biden Administration. They also comment on why patent litigation filings remained active during...
by Matthew Johnson | Mar 19, 2021 | PTAB Trial Basics, Trial Institution
By Sachin Patel and Matt Johnson – The PTAB exercised its discretion in Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., v. Acorn Semi, LLC, IPR2020-01182, Paper 17 (Feb. 10, 2021) to deny inter partes review based on a district court finding the challenged claims indefinite. On June...
by Michael Oblon | Mar 16, 2021 | PTAB News, Trial Institution
By Nick Bagnolo and Michael Oblon – Since the PTAB designated Apple v. Fintiv precedential, the six-factor, “holistic” test has been increasingly used to discretionarily deny institution of petitions challenging claims already subject to parallel litigation...
by Matthew Johnson | Mar 5, 2021 | PTAB News, Trial Institution
By Jennifer Bachorik and Matt Johnson – The USPTO designated Snap, Inc. v. SRK Tech. LLC, IPR2020-00820 (PTAB October 21, 2020) (Paper 15) (“Snap”) as precedential as to § II.A regarding its discretion under 35 U.S.C. § 314(a) to deny institution of inter partes...
by Tom Ritchie | Feb 25, 2021 | Trial Institution
By Tom Ritchie – The PTAB considers the six Fintiv factors to determine whether to exercise its discretion to deny institution of an IPR petition in view of a parallel litigation. In that analysis, Fintiv factor four requires the PTAB to evaluate the overlap...
