PTAB Litigation Blog
  • Home
  • Cookie Policy
  • About
  • Advanced Topics
  • Contributors
  • Contacts
  • Design Patents
  • Discovery
  • District Court
  • Joinder
Select Page
Petitioner Must Explain Differences Among Five Concurrent IPR Petitions

Petitioner Must Explain Differences Among Five Concurrent IPR Petitions

by Matthew Johnson | May 9, 2019 | Trial Institution

By Alex Li and Matt Johnson On April 22, 2019, the PTAB issued an order that the Petitioner must explain the differences among its five petitions to institute inter partes review over the same patent, and that the Patent Owner may respond as to whether any differences...
PTAB Statistics Through First Half of FY 2019

PTAB Statistics Through First Half of FY 2019

by Matthew Johnson | Apr 22, 2019 | PTAB News, Trial Institution

By Matt Johnson Institution rates have ticked up while petition filing rates are even over fiscal year 2018.  The running rate for institutions through the first six months of FY 2019 is at 64% compared to 60% in the previous year.  Through March 2019, 763 IPR...
PTAB Designates Trial Institution Discretion Cases Informative

PTAB Designates Trial Institution Discretion Cases Informative

by David Maiorana | Apr 16, 2019 | Trial Institution

By Kerry Barrett and Dave Maiorana On April 5, 2019, the PTAB designated as informative two decisions relating to 35 U.S.C. § 314(a): IPR2018-00923, Paper 9 (Nov. 7, 2018) (designated: Apr. 5, 2019) [AIA § 314(a), insufficient number of proposed grounds/challenges to...
Seeing Multiple: Observations from Petitioner Filing Strategies Following SAS

Seeing Multiple: Observations from Petitioner Filing Strategies Following SAS

by Joe Sauer | Apr 5, 2019 | Trial Institution

By Kerry Barrett, David Anderson, and Joe Sauer In April 2018, the United States Supreme Court held that the PTAB must issue a final written decision addressing every patent claim challenged in an IPR petition. See SAS Inst., Inc. v. Iancu, 138 S. Ct. 1348 (2018). In...
PTAB Denies Entire IPR Petition as Voluminous and Excessive

PTAB Denies Entire IPR Petition as Voluminous and Excessive

by Matthew Johnson | Apr 3, 2019 | PTAB Trial Basics, Trial Institution

By Levent Herguner and Matt Johnson In a recent decision, the PTAB exercised its discretion under 35 U.S.C. § 314(a) to deny inter partes review of Perfect Company’s (“Patent Owner”) patent.  Adaptics Ltd. v. Perfect Co., IPR2018-01596 (March 6, 2019).  A panel of...
No PTAB Do Over:  After SAS Remand, PTAB Denies All Grounds

No PTAB Do Over: After SAS Remand, PTAB Denies All Grounds

by S. Christian Platt | Feb 21, 2019 | Trial Institution

By Jihong Lou, Christian Platt, and Tom Ritchie Last April, in SAS Institute, Inc. v. Iancu, 138 S. Ct. 1348 (2018), the Supreme Court held that after instituting an inter partes review, the PTAB must decide the patentability of all of the claims the petitioner has...
« 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.