Delayed Payment Proves Fatal for Cultec’s PTAB Challenge
By Marlee Hartenstein and Matt Johnson Under 35 U.S.C. § 315(b), a petition for inter partes review (IPR) may not be filed more than one year after the date on which the petitioner was served with a patent infringement complaint. Thus, a petition must meet all of the...
PTAB Grants Rare Motion To Amend Patent Claim After Federal Circuit Remand
By Christian Damon and John Marlott Last year, the Federal Circuit vacated the Board’s original decision denying the patent owner’s motion to amend two claims in IPR2014-00090, holding that the Board erred by “insist[ing] that the patent owner discuss whether each...
Final Written Decision Not So Final in Eyes of The ITC
By Christian Damon The ITC recently continued its trend of giving little deference to parallel PTAB IPR proceedings. In Certain Network Devices, Related Software and Components Thereof (II), Inv. No. 337-TA-945, the ITC denied a request to suspend or rescind a...
SAS Files Opening Brief in Supreme Court Opposing “Partial” Final Written Decisions
By Greg Castanias On July 20, SAS Institute, Inc., represented by Jones Day, filed its opening brief in the Supreme Court. SAS's brief amplifies the arguments, initially set forth in its petition for certiorari and reply brief in support of certiorari, that neither...
PTAB Terminates IPR Just Under the Statutory Wire
By Jaime Choi Ph.D. and Dave Cochran The patent statute requires the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) to issue a final written decision within one year of instituting an Inter Partes Review (IPR). The recent case of Petroleum Geo-Services Inc. v. Westerngeo LLC...