Despite Granting a Request for Rehearing, the PTAB Maintained Its Finding that Teva’s Copaxone Claims Were Unpatentable as Obvious
By Lisamarie LoGiudice, Ph.D. and Cary Miller, Ph.D. In Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Amneal Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Yeda Research & Development Co. Ltd., IPR2015-00643; -00644; -00830, the PTAB granted-in-part Patent Owner Teva’s request for rehearing of the...
PTAB Agrees to Review Patent Claims Covering Dry Eye Ailments
By Wanli Tang, Ph.D. and J. Patrick Elsevier, Ph.D. On December 8, 2016, the PTAB issued six institution decisions in cases IPR2016-01127, IPR2016-01128, IPR2016-01129, IPR2016-01130, IPR2016-01131, and IPR2016-01132, agreeing to review claims of U.S. Patent Nos....
Continuously Keeping Your IPR Ducks in a Row: Sanctions for Failing to Update the PTAB on Changes in Real Parties of Interest
By Jaime D. Choi Ph.D. IPR petitions are required to identify “all real parties in interest,” among other things because the final written decision of the PTAB prevents the petitioner, the real party in interest, or privy of the petitioner to “request or maintain a...
PTAB Says Copyright Notice Alone Doesn’t Make Out a Printed Publication
By Dave Cochran The PTAB denied institution of inter partes review in IPR2016-01083, Microsoft Corporation v. Corel Software, Inc., because the petitioner – Microsoft – failed to establish that a software reference manual that was part of its sole ground of...
Federal Circuit Reverses PTAB Decision For Failing To Adequately Explain Its Obviousness Findings
By Dave Maiorana The Federal Circuit In In re: NuVasive, Inc. vacated and remanded the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s finding that NuVasive’s claims are unpatentable in IPR2013-00506. The court held that it was unable to review the PTAB’s obviousness findings...