Update: Does § 315(e)(2) Say What It Means and Mean What It Says?
By Emily Tait - When an IPR petition results in a final written decision, the IPR petitioner (or the petitioner’s real party in interest or privy) is estopped from asserting in a civil litigation or an ITC action that “the claim is invalid on any ground...
All or Nothing: Why the Supreme Court SAS Mandate Does not Eliminate the Shaw Safe Harbor
By Lisa Furby, David Anderson, Mike Lavine, and Matt Johnson Last week the Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property published a comment prepared by a team of Jones Day attorneys that analyzed whether the PTAB is treating multiple petitions filed against a common...
IPR Appeal Dismissed After Biosimilar Development Discontinued
By Jihong Lou, Ph.D. and Cary Miller, Ph.D. Article III of the Constitution imposes a “case or controversy” limitation on the jurisdiction of federal courts: an actual case or controversy must exist between the parties at all stages of the federal court proceedings,...
A New Game: Better PTAB Defense Litigation Strategies
Patent Trial and Appeal Board, or PTAB, defense litigation strategies continue to evolve. In a recent Law360 article, Jones Day Intellectual Property lawyers Dave Cochran, Mike Hendershot, and Matt Johnson explained why previous assumptions and strategies pertaining...
Amended Claims In IPRs Must Clear Higher Hurdle Than Original Claims
By John Marlott An IPR of issued patent claims is statutorily limited to prior art challenges based on patents and printed publications under § 102 (novelty) or § 103 (obviousness). The PTAB may not institute an IPR of existing patent claims on other unpatentability...