PTAB Designates Two 35 U.S.C. §315(b) Cases Informative
By Rich Graham and Matt Johnson On January 10, 2018, the PTAB designated two decisions weighing on 35 U.S.C. § 315(b) as informative: Luv N’ Care, Ltd. v. McGinley, IPR2017-01216, Paper 13 (P.T.A.B. Sept. 18, 2017) (AIA § 315(b), insufficient funds at filing) Amneal...
Anticipation Requires More Than A Reference That Discloses All The Elements
By Tom Ritchie and Dave Cochran In Microsoft Corp. v. Biscotti, Inc., Nos. 2016-2080, -2082, -2083, 2017 WL 6613262 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 28, 2017), a divided Federal Circuit panel affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s decision that Microsoft failed to prove that the...
En Banc Federal Circuit Majority Rules Time-Bar Determinations By PTAB Are Appealable
By Greg Castanias, Sasha Mayergoyz, John Marlott, and Dave Cochran In yesterday’s en banc decision in Wi-Fi One v. Broadcom Corp., Nos. 15-1944, -1945 & -1946 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 8, 2018), the en banc Federal Circuit addressed issues regarding judicial review of the...
PTAB Recognizes Limits to Eleventh Amendment Sovereign Immunity
By Joe Sauer and Dave Cochran In a pair of near identical decisions issued on December 19, 2017, an expanded PTAB panel found that the Regents of the University of Minnesota had waived its defense of sovereign immunity by filing actions against the petitioners in...
Declarations as New Evidence to Overcome § 325(d)
By Bing Liang, Ph.D. and Cary Miller, Ph.D. We have published other blog postings relating to 35 U.S.C. §325(d), including a blog posting that addresses the PTAB’s October 24, 2017 notice designating three of its decisions as informative (here). Recently, the PTAB...