PTAB Litigation Blog
  • Home
  • Cookie Policy
  • About
  • Advanced Topics
  • Contributors
  • Contacts
  • Design Patents
  • Discovery
  • District Court
  • Joinder
Select Page
NHK § 314(a) Analysis Results in Denial

NHK § 314(a) Analysis Results in Denial

by Matthew Johnson | Oct 28, 2019 | Trial Institution

By Tom Ritchie and Matt Johnson The status of a parallel district court proceeding may provide a basis for the PTAB to deny institution of an IPR pursuant to § 314(a).  NHK Spring Co. v. Intri-Plex Techs., Inc., IPR2018-00752, Paper 8 (PTAB Sep. 12, 2018)...
IPR Goes Forward Despite Late Stage Parallel ITC Investigation

IPR Goes Forward Despite Late Stage Parallel ITC Investigation

by Matthew Johnson | Oct 16, 2019 | Trial Institution

By: Yury Kalish and Vishal Khatri – Since their inception as part of the AIA, inter partes reviews (IPRs) have been a favorite tool in the arsenal of patent challengers.  Their statutorily mandated 18-month schedule oftentimes allows the PTAB to resolve a question of...
Panel Including Director Iancu Institutes Unchallenged Petition for IPR

Panel Including Director Iancu Institutes Unchallenged Petition for IPR

by Matthew Johnson | Sep 19, 2019 | PTAB News, PTAB Trial Basics, Trial Institution

By Mike Lavine and Matt Johnson On September 6, 2019, a PTAB panel including USPTO Director Andrei Iancu instituted inter partes review (“IPR”) of U.S. Patent No. 9,279,259 (“the ‘259 Patent”).  The ‘259 Patent is directed to a tile lippage removal system and is owned...
Should You File A “Copycat” IPR Petition?

Should You File A “Copycat” IPR Petition?

by Matthew Johnson | Sep 16, 2019 | Joinder, Trial Institution

By Alex Li and Matt Johnson If you don’t have new grounds to add, you may as well copycat. On September 4, 2019, the PTAB denied Microsoft’s petition requesting inter partes review (“IPR”) of U.S. Patent No. 7,167,487 (“the ’487 patent”); furthermore, the panel also...
Strategic Decision to Forgo Expert Does Not Allow a “Second Bite”

Strategic Decision to Forgo Expert Does Not Allow a “Second Bite”

by Emily Tait | Sep 9, 2019 | Expert Witnesses, Petitions, Trial Institution

By Emily Tait The PTAB recently denied petitioner’s request for rehearing of a decision denying institution of inter partes review, rejecting the argument that the Board’s denial was based on an erroneous analysis of the “non-exhaustive” General Plastic factors.  See...
Decision to Deny Institution not Reviewable Despite Prior PTAB Trial

Decision to Deny Institution not Reviewable Despite Prior PTAB Trial

by Marc S. Blackman | Sep 4, 2019 | Federal Circuit Appeal, Trial Institution

By Marc Blackman In a split decision, the Federal Circuit dismissed three consolidated appeals holding that the PTAB’s decisions to deny institution were not appealable even though the PTAB previously had instituted the IPRs and proceeded through trial.  BioDelivery...
« 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.