by Matthew Johnson | Aug 19, 2019 | Petitions, Trial Institution
By Levent Herguner and Matt Johnson In a recent decision, the PTAB decided to institute inter partes review (“IPR”) of U.S. Patent No. 7,937,394 B2 despite Patent Owner’s claims that Petitioner engaged in gamesmanship and asserted references and combinations that were...
by Albert Liou | Aug 12, 2019 | Claim Construction, PTAB News, Trial Institution
By Albert Liou On August 8, 2019, the Patent Trial Appeal Board held a Boardside Chat webinar to discuss the July 2019 changes to the AIA Trial Practice Guide. Vice Chief Administrative Judges Michael Tierney and Tim Fink led the discussion on the various changes...
by Matthew Johnson | Aug 9, 2019 | Trial Institution
The PTAB recently designated two decisions as precedential and one decision as informative on discretion to institute review. Becton, Dickinson and Company v. B. Braun Melsungen AG, Case IPR2017-01586 (PTAB Dec. 15, 2017) (Paper 8) – (precedential as to section...
by Greg Castanias | Jun 25, 2019 | Time Limits, Trial Institution
Gregory A Castanias and Jihong Lou On June 24, in Dex Media, Inc. v. Click-To-Call Technologies, LP, No. 18-916 (U.S.), the Supreme Court agreed to review the question whether 35 U.S.C. § 314(d) permits appeal of the PTAB’s decision to institute an inter partes review...
by Kenneth Luchesi | Jun 17, 2019 | Evidentiary Issues, Trial Institution
By Kenny Luchesi The Board has broad discretion to determine how much weight should be given to inventor testimony, but as long as the testimony does not relate to the inventor’s opinion about the meaning of a claim term, there is no basis for broadly excluding all...
by Matthew Johnson | Jun 5, 2019 | PTAB Trial Basics, Trial Institution
By Sue Gerber and Matt Johnson Petitioners beware. The PTAB will not “play archaeologist with the record” or assume the burden of making arguments if the Petitioner fails to present the asserted reasons for invalidity with the required specificity. Amazon Web...
