Collateral Estoppel Applied by District Court Following IPR on Similar Patents
By Phillip Shelton and Carl Kukkonen - In Think Prod., Inc. v. ACCO Brands Corp., No. 18-CV-07506, 2019 WL 6609427, at *1 (N.D. Ill. Dec. 5, 2019), the District Court addressed whether the plaintiff patent ower was collaterally estopped from arguing validity in view...
Control of IPR Petition Remains Primary Factor in RPI Determination
By Robby Breetz and Matt Johnson Determining the Real Party-in-Interest (“RPI”) in an IPR can have critical implications for estoppel. A patent owner can prevent institution of an IPR by showing that an RPI has previously “filed a civil action challenging the...
A Compelling Decision – Board Addresses Scope Of Work Product Protection
By Marlee Hartenstein and Matt Johnson - In a series of IPR proceedings between Petitioner Adobe Inc. and Patent Owner RAH Color Technologies LLC, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board declined to extend attorney work product protection to deposition questions seeking the...
POP: What Makes A Book A “Printed Publication”?
By Alex Li and Matt Johnson - A petition to institute an inter partes review (IPR) can only be filed on the basis of prior art consisting of patents and printed publications. But what makes a reference a “printed publication”? On December 20, 2019, the Precedential...
Update: Parties, Government Seek Rehearing in Arthrex
By Nate Andrews and Emily Tait - January 17 Update: On January 17, each of the parties filed responses to the rehearing petitions, linked here: Government Response, Appellant Arthrex's Response, Appellee Smith & Nephew's Response As we have previously discussed...