new-email-outline

Postpone Moving to the Reservation

February, 27th, 2018

By Christopher J. Stankus The PTAB recently limited companies’ ability to utilize the doctrine of sovereign immunity to avoid IPR proceedings. Companies have been assigning their patents to state entities and Tribal governments to protect [Read More…]

PTAB Persistence Doesn’t Always Pay

December, 12th, 2017

By Benjamin N. Luehrs In a recent precedential opinion, the PTAB adopted a seven-factor test for determining whether to institute a “follow-on” IPR petition.[1] Follow-on petitions seek to invalidate the same claims as a previous IPR [Read More…]

Amending Burdens: Federal Circuit Changes Law so IPR Petitioners Must Prove Amended Claims Unpatentable

November, 22nd, 2017

By Robert D. Keeler Inter partes review (“IPR”) proceedings are infamous for their high patent invalidation rate. To protect against wholesale patent loss, Congress gave Patent Owners the right to make narrowing amendments to any challenged [Read More…]

IPR Estoppel – Anything You Say May Be Used Against You In A Court Of Law

September, 26th, 2017

By Michael J. Kosma A Magistrate Judge in the Eastern District of Texas recently issued a report and recommendation finding that a plaintiff’s infringement claims were estopped due to prosecution disclaimer from statements made in [Read More…]

IPR Petitions Collapse For Failure to Identify Structure Corresponding to Means-Plus-Function Claims

September, 8th, 2017

By Benjamin N. Luehrs On August 29, 2017, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or “the Board”) issued a pair of decisions denying institution of inter partes review (IPR) because the petitioner failed to [Read More…]

The Great Chemical Divide: Federal Circuit Suggests the Insubstantial Differences Test for Evaluating Equivalence in Chemical Patent Cases

July, 14th, 2017

By Mackenzie L. Long In 1950 the Supreme Court outlined the two tests for evaluating the doctrine of equivalents in the case, Graver Tank & Mfg. Co. v. Linde Air Products Co., 339 U.S. 605, [Read More…]

Shaw-shank Relitigation: District Courts Chiseling Away at Estoppel Provisions

June, 27th, 2017

By Robert D. Keeler Congress established inter partes review (“IPR”) as a less expensive, more efficient method of challenging the validity of a patent. Indeed, Congress explained that the IPR is a “complete[] substitute for [Read More…]

Dislike v. Discourage: The Metes and Bounds of Successful “Teaching Away” Arguments

May, 9th, 2017

By Benjamin N. Luehrs A patentee can overcome obvious-type rejections by establishing that a prior art reference “teaches away” from the applicant’s invention. This argument is often difficult to make, however. Unless the prior art [Read More…]

Once is Enough: Assessing Previously-Used Prior Art and Arguments at the PTAB

January, 10th, 2017

By Robert D. Keeler Under the AIA, the PTAB can deny institution of an IPR, CBM, or PGR because “the same or substantially the same prior art or arguments previously were presented to the Office.” [Read More…]

© Copyright 2022 Whitmyer IP Group