Decision Kicking PUMA’s Petition Against Nike Designated Informative
By John Kinton and Amanda Leckman - As we noted here, the PTAB recently designated two 35 U.S.C. § 325(d) cases precedential and one informative. Here is an in depth review of the informative decision. On October 31, 2019, the PTAB denied PUMA North America, Inc....
District Court Awards Fees After PTAB Cancels Claims
By Alex Li and Matt Johnson - Patent litigation can be quite costly to defend against, that’s no secret. But when can a prevailing defendant recover its attorneys’ fees from the plaintiff, patent holder, and under what circumstances? Under the “American Rule,” each...
Certain PTAB Due Dates Eligible for Extension Based on COVID-19 Delay
By Matt Johnson - On March 31, 2020, the Patent Office issued a Notice of Waiver of Patent-Related Timing Deadlines under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act) passed by Congress last week. Under the due date modification authority...
Precedential: Two-Part Framework for Applying § 325(d)
By Josh Nightingale and Matt Johnson - As we noted here, the PTAB recently designated two 35 U.S.C. § 325(d) cases precedential and one informative. Here is an in depth review of a first of the precedential designated decisions. On March 24, 2020, the PTAB designated...
PTAB Designates Two §325(d) Opinions Precedential, One Informative
By Matt Johnson - Last week, the PTAB designated two 35 U.S.C. § 325(d) cases precedential and one informative. These cases discuss the Board’s process for deciding when to use their discretion to deny institution because a Petition raises issues that the Patent...