Standard for Indefiniteness in PGR Proceedings – Nautilus or Packard?
In PGR2015-00018, Petitioner Telebrands Corp. filed a petition for post-grant review of claims 1-14 of U.S. Patent No. 9,051,066 (filed September 2014, issued June 2015). In the attached decision, described below, the Board instituted post-grant review, finding that...
PTAB Designates Two Decisions As Precedential
On January 12, 2016, the PTAB identified two of its recent decisions as being precedential. These two decisions are in line with prior panel decisions and solidify the Board's policy with regard to aspects of the one year IPR bar and the application of estoppels at...
More Real Party In Interest
Elekta, Inc. v. Varian Medical Systems, Inc., IPR2015-01401, Institution Decision, December 31, 2015. On New Year's Eve, the PTAB opted to permit petitioner Elekta to adjust the real parties in interest identified in its Petition without adjusting the filing date of...
Dynamic Drinkware Dooms Another Petitioner’s Prior Art
Summary -- Two Key Lessons: (1) The petitioner bears the initial burden of production to show that a challenged patent is not entitled to its earliest effective filing date. (2) Under Dynamic Drinkware, the petitioner must show that the claims of a published patent...
Federal Circuit On Combining References
Practice Tip: Significant attention should be paid to motivations to combine rationales in petition drafting especially at the PTAB Trial Phase versus the Appeal Phase. Belden Inc. v. Berk-Tek LLC, Appeal Nos. 2014-1575, -1576 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 5, 2015) - Appeal from...