IP Watchdog

JANUARY 27, 2022

The last day of PTAB Masters™ 2022 featured sessions on dealing with parallel litigation at the International Trade Commission (ITC) and district courts in Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) proceedings; life sciences and inter partes review (IPR); and the future of the PTAB.

Invention 72

Invention Litigation Trademark Patent 72

Patently-O

AUGUST 4, 2021

One of the topics to be discussed at tomorrow’s PPAC meeting is USPTO operations following the Supreme Court’s 2021 Arthrex decision. In Arthrex , the Supreme Court created an additional layer of review by the PTO Director in Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceedings following a PTAB final written decision.

Patent 92

Patent 92

Patently-O

NOVEMBER 29, 2023

Article III standing remains a hot topic at all levels of federal litigation and across many different areas of law. Inter partes review is not unique. Allgenesis petitioned for IPR of all eleven claims of the ’820 patent. In Allgenesis Biotherapeutics Inc. Cloudbreak Therapeutics, LLC , Case No. 22-1706 (Fed.

Art 49

Art Business Patent Settlement 49

LexBlog IP

NOVEMBER 17, 2022

The first notice, titled “Expanding Opportunities To Appear Before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board,” [2] requests public comments on four topics. Currently, non-registered practitioners must be admitted pro hac vice in each AIA proceeding, such as Inter Partes Review (IPR) and Post Grant Review (PGR).

Registration 52

Registration Design Patent Patent Trademark 52

Patently-O

SEPTEMBER 26, 2022

Topics: Enablement / Written Description (All three are biotech / pharma): 3 Cases; Infringement (FDA Labeling): 1 Case; Anticipation (On Sale Bar): 1 Case; Double Patenting (Still the law?) But, it is tough to get the Supreme Court to hear a review on detailed factual findings. Post IPR Estoppel in Apple Inc. Caltech , No.

Patent Law 126

Patent Law Law Patent Invention 126

Patently-O

FEBRUARY 24, 2022

Appellate Standing for IPR Challenger : Apple Inc. Qualcomm , a case focusing on appellate standing following an IPR final written decision favoring the patentee. The statute indicates that any party to an IPR final-written-decision has a right to appeal. Qualcomm Incorporated , No. 21-746 (CVSG requested February 22, 2022).

Patent Law 95

Patent Law Law Patent Litigation 95

Intellectual Property Law Blog

AUGUST 10, 2023

Topic This case addresses the proper standard for an appeal of a discretionary decision by a successor judge as well as requests for attorneys’ fees under 35 U.S.C. § The IPRs were decided three years later, leaving infringement litigation alive, at which point the District Court lifted the stay and reinstated the case.

IP 130

IP Litigation Patent Law 130