Tag Archives: Related District Court Litigation

A Limit on the Board’s Power – Denial of Motion to Amend Claims was Unreasonable

By Julianne M. Hartzell on September 1, 2016 Posted in Amendments

While the Federal Circuit has accepted, en banc, the question of what a patent owner must demonstrate to the Board to obtain leave to amend its claims in an IPR as discussed in our earlier blog post (In re Aqua Products, No. 2015-1177 petition for rehearing en banc granted, 2016 WL 4375651 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 12, … Continue Reading

The PTAB Has No Sympathy for the Last Minute Filer

By Julianne M. Hartzell on May 31, 2016 Posted in Institution / Denial, Trial Procedures

Institution was denied in two IPR proceedings on the grounds that the petitions were filed more than one year after petitioner was served with a complaint alleging patent infringement. The documents were electronically filed but proof of payment of filing fees were one minute and nine minutes late, respectively. Additionally service had not been completed … Continue Reading

Without Estoppel, Are Redundant Grounds Now a Petitioner’s Friend?

By Julianne M. Hartzell on April 12, 2016 Posted in Estoppel

The Federal Circuit recently confirmed the Board’s interpretation that § 315(e) estoppel does not take effect with respect to prior art that the Board declines to address as redundant. In two recent cases, Shaw Industries Group v. Automated Creel Sys., Nos. 15-1116, 15-1119, __ F.3d __, at*6-9 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 23, 2016) and HP, Inc. … Continue Reading

When Might a Request for Rehearing of Final Decision Be Worthwhile?

By Julianne M. Hartzell on March 3, 2016 Posted in Trial Procedures

In an earlier blog post from last June, we were unable to find any successful Requests for Rehearing or Reconsideration of a Final Written Decision and concluded that, in most instances, such requests are generally a waste of resources. However, while the PTAB has continued to deny the vast majority of motions for rehearing of … Continue Reading

District Court Denies Recovery of PTAB Costs in Non-Exceptional Case

By Julianne M. Hartzell on January 14, 2016 Posted in Covered Business Method

On January 5, a district court denied defendant Westlake Services, LLC’s Motion for recovery of costs related to CBM petitions that invalidated certain of the patent claims asserted in the pending litigation and prompted plaintiff to voluntarily dismiss the district court case. Credit Acceptance Corp. v. Westlake Services, LLC, Case 13cv01523 (C.D. Cal. January 5, … Continue Reading

Arthrex and the Supreme Court

In United States v. Arthrex, Inc., the Supreme Court has heard whether 125+ PTAB decisions rendered through October 2019 must be remanded for new decisions. Read about how that issue developed through our posts.

About This Blog

PTABWatch, provided by Marshall, Gerstein & Borun LLP, analyzes and reports recent developments concerning Post-Grant Proceedings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), including Inter Partes Review (IPR), Post Grant Review (PGR), and Covered Business Method (CBM) proceedings.

Stay Connected

Subscribe to this blog by Email

Your website url

Topics

Amendments
Appeals
Artificial Intelligence
Biotechnology
CBM
Claim Construction
Covered Business Method
Discovery
Estoppel
Ex Parte
Institution / Denial
Inter Partes Review
Interferences
IPR
Joinder
Legislation
Machine Learning
Obviousness
Post Grant Review
Printed Publication
PTAB
Real Party-in-Interest
Reexamination
Section 101
Section 112
Sections 102/103
Stays
Trial Procedures
Uncategorized

The material contained on this blog is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Views expressed are those of the author and are not to be attributed to Marshall, Gerstein & Borun LLP or any of its clients. The publication and receipt of any information contained on this blog does not create an attorney-client relationship with Marshall, Gerstein & Borun LLP or with any of its attorneys. Readers should not act upon any information on this site without seeking professional legal counsel.

Marshall, Gerstein & Borun LLP PTABWatch

Marshall, Gerstein & Borun LLP

233 South Wacker Drive
Suite 6300

Chicago, IL 60606-6357

T: +1.312.474.6300

RSS RSS

LinkedIn LinkedIn

Twitter Twitter

Disclaimer
Privacy Policy

About Marshall, Gerstein & Borun LLP

Marshall, Gerstein & Borun LLP is dedicated to intellectual property law and has had this exclusive focus since it was founded in 1955. The Firm protects, enforces and transfers the intellectual property of its clients in more than 100 countries on six continents.