PTAB Forgives MTA Procedural Error
By Tova Werblowsky and Matt Johnson - The Federal Circuit affirmed in part, reversed-in-part and remanded-in-part the Board’s decision in the inter partes review of U.S. Patent No. 8,265,096 (the “’096 patent”), and affirmed the Board’s decision as to the cross appeal...
Director Provides Reminders For Obviousness Analysis
By Scott Findley* and Sarah Geers - On July 9, 2024, Director Vidal reversed and remanded a denial of institution of inter partes review (IPR) relating to three Spin Master patents. See Prime Time Toys LLC v. Spin Master, Inc., IPR Nos. 2023-01339, 2023-01348,...
PTAB Updates its SOP for Assigning Judges to Panels
By Carl Kukkonen - The PTAB recently updated its Standard Operating Procedure 1 (SOP), which describes the process and guidelines for assigning judges to panels in all jurisdictions of the Board. This blog post highlights some of the key features of the revised SOP...
District Court Charts Middle Ground In Prosecution Bar
By Nick Marasco,* Matt Modderman, Matt Johnson - The U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware recently issued a protective order settling a dispute over the scope of a proposed prosecution bar. Aerin Medical Inc. v. Neurent Medical Inc., No. 23-756, Dkt. Nos....
PTAB Nixes IPR Revival
By Ariana Tsanas*, Matt Johnson, and Daniel Sloan - On May 6th, 2024, the PTAB declined Ubiquiti Inc.’s (“Petitioner’s”) request to institute inter partes review. Ubiquiti Inc. v. XR Communications LLC D/B/A Vivato Tech., IPR2024-00148, Paper 12 (May 6, 2024). The...