Section 285 Did Not Allow For IPR Fees
By Pranita Dhunghana* and Emily Tait - The Patent Act provides that “[t]he court in exceptional cases may award reasonable attorney fees to the prevailing party.” 35 U.S.C. § 285. In a recent denial of a motion for attorney fees pursuant to § 285, an Ohio district...
The Board Declines To Apply Interference Estoppel
By Ryan Camp,* Sachin Patel, and Josh Nightingale – On June 14, 2022, the Board instituted Zynga Inc.’s (“Zynga”) petition for IPR against U.S. Patent No. 7,168,089 (the “’089 patent”), rejecting Patent Owner IGT’s argument that interference estoppel should preclude...
Domestic Patent Reference Entitled to Foreign Priority Date
By Eric Jjemba,* Evan Jones, and Matt Johnson - On June 1, 2022, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board issued a Final Written Decision finding unpatentable three claims of AutoStore Technology AS’s (“AutoStore’s”) U.S. Patent No. 10,294,025 (“the ’025 patent”), while...
Interim Fintiv Guidance Discussed in PTAB Boardside Chat
By Victoria Kline* and Josh Nightingale - During the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) Boardside Chat on July 7, 2022, discussion focused on Director Katherine Vidal’s interim guidance on discretionary denials under the Board’s precedential Apple v. Fintiv...
Interim Procedure for Discretionary Denials Established
By David Linden and Dave Maiorana - On June 21, USPTO Director Kathi Vidal issued a memorandum concerning the PTAB’s practice of determining whether to institute an AIA post-grant proceeding in view of the Fintiv factors. The memorandum is in part a result of...