by David Cochran | Jul 21, 2020 | Trial Institution
By Dave Cochran – In its precedential decision in Apple Inc. v. Fintiv, Inc., IPR 2020-00019, paper 11 (PTAB Mar. 20, 2020), the PTAB set forth a six factor “holistic” test for balancing considerations of system efficiency, fairness, and patent quality when a...
by Matthew Johnson | Jul 10, 2020 | Trial Institution
By Sue Gerber and Matt Johnson – Recently, we reported about the Supreme Court’s decision holding that the AIA’s “no appeal” provision in 35 U.S.C. § 314(d) means that the PTAB’s decision not to institute IPR because a petition is time barred under 35 U.S.C....
by Tom Ritchie | Jul 8, 2020 | Trial Institution
By Prateek Viswanathan* and Thomas Ritchie – By creating the new precedential Fintiv factors, the PTAB provides guidance on what it will consider when deciding whether to deny institution of an IPR petition challenging patent claims that are also being litigated...
by Matthew Johnson | Jul 1, 2020 | Claim Construction, Trial Institution
By Mike Lavine and Matt Johnson – On June 18, 2020, the PTAB denied an IPR petition because the Petitioner failed to sufficiently construe the means-plus-limitations of the challenged claims. Mattersight Corporation (“Mattersight”) owns the challenged patent,...
by John Marlott | Jun 22, 2020 | PTAB News, Trial Institution
By Chris Liu and John Marlott – If the PTAB judges who denied institution of an IPR were unconstitutionally appointed under Arthrex at the time they issued that decision, does the petitioner get a second chance with a new panel of different PTAB judges? As we...
by Matthew Johnson | Jun 16, 2020 | Trial Institution
By Marlee Hartenstein and Matt Johnson – In 3Shape A/S v. Align Tech., Inc., IPR2020-00223, Paper 12 (May 26, 2020), the PTAB declined to deny institution of an inter partes review involving a patent challenged in a pending ITC investigation. Despite the...
