PTAB Litigation Blog
  • Home
  • Cookie Policy
  • About
  • Advanced Topics
  • Contributors
  • Contacts
  • Design Patents
  • Discovery
  • District Court
  • Joinder
Select Page
Statutory Disclaimer After Petition Bars Institution

Statutory Disclaimer After Petition Bars Institution

by Matthew Johnson | Dec 22, 2023 | Prior Art Issues, PTAB News, Trial Institution

By Hannah Mehrle and Matt Johnson – In IPR2023-01058, the PTAB declined to institute IPR, finding that Patent Owner had disclaimed all challenged claims under 35 U.S.C. § 243(a), in compliance with 37 C.F.R. § 1.321(a), such that there was no basis on which to...
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...
Institution Denied Based On Written Description in “Alternative Embodiments”

Institution Denied Based On Written Description in “Alternative Embodiments”

by Evan McLean | Nov 29, 2023 | Prior Art Issues, PTAB News, Trial Institution

By Evan Jones and Evan McLean – On September 21, 2023, the PTAB denied United Services Automobile Association’s petition to institute inter partes review of Auto Telematics’s U.S. Patent No. 9,633,487.  IPR2023-00519, Paper 10. The ’487 patent relates generally...
Narrow Stipulation Results in Fintiv Denial

Narrow Stipulation Results in Fintiv Denial

by David Maiorana | Nov 21, 2023 | PTAB News, PTAB Trial Basics, Trial Institution

By David Linden and Dave Maiorana – On March 31, 2023, Zhuhai CosMX Battery Co., Ltd. (“Zhuhai”) filed a petition for inter partes review (“IPR”) of claims of U.S. Patent No. 11,329,352 (“the ’352 Patent”), assigned to Ningde Amperex Technology Ltd....
RULEMAKING: PTO Aims for Transparency, Judicial Independence at PTAB

RULEMAKING: PTO Aims for Transparency, Judicial Independence at PTAB

by Matthew Johnson | Nov 17, 2023 | Final Written Decisions, PTAB News, PTAB Trial Basics, Trial Institution

By Christian Roberts and Matthew Johnson – On October 6, 2023, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (“NPR”) making changes to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (“PTAB”) internal circulation and review...
Failure to Make Full Sotera-Stipulation Contributes to Denial

Failure to Make Full Sotera-Stipulation Contributes to Denial

by Matthew Johnson | Nov 10, 2023 | PTAB News, PTAB Trial Basics, Trial Institution

By Evan Tassis and Matt Johnson – In an increasingly rare exercise of discretion, the PTAB denied institution of inter partes review under Fintiv in Zhuhai Cosmx Battery Co., Ltd. v. Ningde Amperex Technology Limited, IPR2023-00587.  The PTAB reasoned that the...
« 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.