Tag: inter partes review

Arthrex Is Here—What Will It Mean?

Yesterday, the Supreme Court handed down its much-awaited decision—at least, much-awaited by people who care about patents and the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)—in the consolidated U.S. v A...

One Case, All The Problems: VLSI v. Intel Exemplifies Current Issues In Patent Litigation

Patent litigation suffers from a number of issues at present. Hedge funds backing non-practicing entities (NPEs) in order to chase a share of billion-dollar judgments.  Plaintiffs using d...

New Study Shows That IPR Delivers An Economic Benefit, Even If The District Court Doesn’t Stay Litigation

New research from the Perryman Group shows that inter partes review (IPR) is economically beneficial, even if co-pending district court litigation isn’t stayed.  The Perryman study, commissione...

Comments on USPTO’s Newest Regulation Overall Oppose Discretionary Denial Rules

The USPTO is considering whether to enshrine discretionary denial of inter partes review cases into regulation.  Last week, comments were due on the most recent portion of this process.  (CC...

Changes Reducing IPR Institution Rate Have Increased Litigation Frequency and Cost

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s precedential opinions on discretionary denial are the subject of significant attention—a withdrawn attempt by the Trump Administration to codify discretionar...

PTAB Denies IPR Petitions Filed Less Than One Month After Lawsuit

On Monday, the PTAB made clear that the ultimate outcome of the Fintiv rule championed by Director Iancu is the elimination of inter partes review (IPR) as a viable alternative to challenging patents ...

Cert Granted in Arthrex Case On PTAB Appointments

This week, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in a set of related cases between Arthrex and Smith & Nephew, as well as the federal government.  The cases revolve around one fundamental ques...

Comments Emphasize Flaws In PTO Proposal To Remove Pre-Institution Presumption

Recently, the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) proposed a concerning new rule.  It would create serious due process problems, violate the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) by changing an agency...

Federal Circuit Holds That PTAB Should Consider § 101 When Reviewing Proposed Amended Claims

In today’s Uniloc v. Hulu decision, the Federal Circuit held that the PTAB is permitted to consider all issues of patentability, including § 101 (and presumably including § 112), when a patent own...

Subscribe to Patent Progress

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.