dddd

Tag: ipr

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...

New Report Confirms IPR Has Had Significant Positive Impacts On U.S. Industry

A recent report, prepared by economists at the Perryman Group, confirms what has long been stated to be the case—inter partes review (IPR) has positively impacted the U.S. economy.   In...

In Thryv, Supreme Court Clarifies Bar On Review of Institution Decisions

In today’s decision in Thryv v. Click-To-Call, the Supreme Court held that the AIA means what it says—decisions to institute an inter partes review “shall be final and nonappealable.” (mor...

A Follow-up on CyWee and ZTE v. LG and the Public

A few weeks ago, I covered a PTAB case that illustrates why the PTO’s proposed rule on who bears the burden on amended claims in IPRs is fatally flawed.  In that case, ZTE challenged a CyWee pa...

CyWee, ZTE, and the PTAB v. the Public Interest

In an order issued this week in IPR2019-00143, a panel of PTAB judges decided that the public has no interest in ensuring that only valid patent claims issue from the Patent Office. That’s not an...

Polaris Concurrence Explains Why Arthrex Was Wrong, But Signals Federal Circuit Won’t Fix It

Today’s Federal Circuit decision in Polaris v. Kingston had an unsurprising outcome—in line with last year’s Arthrex decision, the PTAB’s determination was remanded back to the PTO for review ...

Subscribe to Patent Progress

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.