LexBlog IP

JUNE 23, 2022

The Patent Reexamination and Invalidation Department (PRID) of the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) invalidated the CN Invention Patent No. The novelty art is an article published within the grace period (i.e., 201310567987.0 (the 201310567987.0 (the 1] See , [link].

Art 52

Art Patent Prosecution Patent Application Intellectual Property 52

The IP Law Blog

JANUARY 6, 2022

28, 2021), the Court granted defendants’ motion to stay pending ex parte reexamination even though the case had already previously been stayed pending inter partes review. As background, on March 19, 2020, the court granted a motion to stay the instant case during the pendency of an inter partes review of one of the patents at issue.

Litigation 98

Litigation Patent Art Patent Law 98

Intellectual Property Law Blog

MARCH 15, 2021

District Court of Delaware that patent claims were invalid for indefiniteness based on conflicting positions taken by the patentee during prosecution. After further prosecution, a patent was granted. Later, the patent was subjected to ex parte reexaminations. Background. Infinity Computer Products , 20-1189 at 12.

Patent 100

Patent Public Domain Patent Application Art 100

Patent Trademark Blog

JULY 11, 2022

Mission Impossible: Can you block a design patent application? Design patent applications are not publicly viewable. It can be nearly impossible to figure out what design patent applications are pending. Suppose your competitor indicates that their product is patent-pending. Mission #3: Find relevant prior art.

Design Patent 52

Design Patent Patent Application Designs Design 52

Patently-O

AUGUST 28, 2023

28, 2023) regarding how Patent Term Adjustment (PTA) interacts with terminal disclaimers and obviousness-type double patenting (ODP). This case establishes binding precedent that a terminal disclaimer cuts off any extended patent term granted through PTA. Thus, PTE extends beyond a disclaimed term, while PTA does not.

Patent 52

Patent Invention Ownership Inventor 52

IP Watchdog

NOVEMBER 28, 2022

Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO’s) grant of a request for ex parte reexamination of Sound View Innovations’ U.S. The '213 patent covers a "Method for Streaming Multimedia Information Over Public Networks." 6,708,213 by DISH Network LLC.

Art 69

Art Patent Trademark Government 69

The IP Law Blog

MARCH 26, 2021

The validity of a United States patent can be challenged in federal court litigation. Patents can also be challenged in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, which, in most cases, is a quicker and less costly process. In IPRs and PGRs, anyone except the patent owner may file a petition to challenge the patent.

Patent 52

Patent Litigation Art Ownership 52

LexBlog IP

JANUARY 6, 2022

28, 2021), the Court granted defendants’ motion to stay pending ex parte reexamination even though the case had already previously been stayed pending inter partes review. As background, on March 19, 2020, the court granted a motion to stay the instant case during the pendency of an inter partes review of one of the patents at issue.

Litigation 52

Litigation Patent Art Intellectual Property 52

JD Supra Law

SEPTEMBER 3, 2021

After an inter partes review (“IPR”) is instituted, a patent owner may move to amend challenged claims to overcome the prior art. However, there are also alternative paths to amending claims over the prior art even after an IPR has been instituted. Timing, however, is important in both cases. The Office will consider a reissue.

Intellectual Property 52

Intellectual Property Art Patent Trademark 52

Patently-O

OCTOBER 7, 2022

D746,078 (Patent being litigated). Zahner sued Katri Sales for infringement, and the defendant turned-around and filed a request for ex parte reexamination. The examiner found some great prior art from 2013, which predates this particular design application filing date. Close-up of the Design Patent drawing.

Design Patent 77

Design Patent Designs Design Patent 77

Fish & Richardson Trademark & Copyright Thoughts

OCTOBER 5, 2022

Supplemental examination allows a patent owner (only) to ask the USPTO to consider, reconsider, or correct any information the patent owner deems relevant to the patent. This is true regardless of whether or not an ex parte reexamination is instituted by the USPTO in response to a supplemental examination request.

Invention 52

Invention Art Litigation Patent 52

Fish & Richardson Trademark & Copyright Thoughts

OCTOBER 5, 2022

Ex parte reexamination (EPRx) has been available since 1981 (see MPEP 2200 ) and remains available under the America Invents Act (AIA). reexamination) of the patent in question. For the most part, as its name implies, ex parte reexamination proceedings involve only the patent owner and the USPTO.

Art 40

Art Invention Patent Litigation 40

LexBlog IP

SEPTEMBER 5, 2023

The Federal Circuit recently upheld the Patent Office’s decision to reject claims in four separate reexamination cases due to obviousness-type double patenting (ODP). Unless overturned, this decision will significantly affect patent families that have patents with different expiration dates.

Patent 52

Patent Patent Application Inventor Intellectual Property 52

LexBlog IP

AUGUST 8, 2023

The Patent Office is not supposed to issue separate patents for the same invention to competing inventors. Several statutory provisions empower the Office to reject pre-AIA patent application claims of the later inventor. But sometimes it’s not clear who is the later inventor. Those provisions are therefore unhelpful.

Patent 52

Patent Invention Inventor Patent Application 52

JD Supra Law

AUGUST 30, 2022

26, 2022) - In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit addressed issues of jurisdiction where a challenged claim was canceled through ex parte reexamination during pending inter partes review proceedings, and otherwise affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s determination that challenged claims were obvious over the prior art.

Art 55

Art Patent 55

LexBlog IP

OCTOBER 12, 2021

Section 325(d) gives the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) discretion to deny a post-grant petition when “the same or substantially the same prior art or arguments previously were presented to the Office.” The Federal Circuit has now held that § 325(d) applies to requests for ex parte reexamination.

Patent 52

Patent Art Intellectual Property 52

LexBlog IP

AUGUST 22, 2023

According to the petition, the ’992 patent claims “encompass a formulation comprising the VEGF inhibitor protein, aflibercept, which Regeneron markets under the trade name EYLEA®, and three excipients that are commonly used to stabilize proteins like aflibercept: polysorbate 20, phosphate buffer, and sucrose.”

Patent 52

Patent Copying Art Litigation 52

LexBlog IP

MARCH 29, 2022

The Patent Reexamination and Invalidation Department (PRID) of the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) maintained the validity of CN Invention Patent No. the ’000 patent) in an invalidation proceeding. [1] the ’000 patent) in an invalidation proceeding. [1] patent practice.

Invention 40

Invention Intellectual Property Art Patent 40

Patently-O

JULY 13, 2021

Folks continue to file anonymous ex parte reexaminations. Design Patent No. The reexamination examiner agreed with the challenge and issued a final rejection that the claimed design was anticipated by four different prior art references. D810,925 (“breast pump”). Door-Master Corp. Yorktowne Inc. ,

Inventor 77

Inventor Art Designs Design 77

LexBlog IP

FEBRUARY 24, 2022

Dispute Over Reexamination Vacatur Sent Back to VA Court. Indeed, patent reexamination filings — the clunky mechanism the AIA was supposed to supplant — surged by 60+% last year. The sole express textual preclusion in the ex parte reexamination scheme does not support preclusion here. § 315(e)(1).

Invention 52

Invention Patent Art Government 52

Patently-O

MAY 20, 2024

May 20, 2024), Cellect argues that the Federal Circuit erred in upholding the PTAB’s (PTAB) invalidation of Cellect’s four patents based on the judicially-created doctrine of obviousness-type double patenting (ODP). As a result, the patents had staggered expiration dates. Meanwhile, Dir. Cellect Cert.

Invention 49

Invention Inventor Public Domain Patent 49

Patent Trademark Blog

JUNE 7, 2023

What makes the cost of patent litigation so high? What would you think if I told you that the average patent litigation cost exceeds well over $1 million ? To put it another way, how would you feel knowing that one million dollars might not get you halfway through a patent lawsuit? What factors make patent litigation so costly?

Litigation 52

Litigation Patent Patent Infringement Licensing 52

LexBlog IP

JULY 28, 2023

On July 19 and 20, 2023, the PTAB granted institution of IPR2023-00442 , filed by Samsung Bioepis regarding Regeneron’s Patent No. 10,130,681 which is directed to treating angiogenic eye disorders with alibercept, and institution of IPR2023-00462 , filed by Celltrion regarding Regeneron’s Patent No. 90/014,448). .”

Art 52

Art Reporting Patent Intellectual Property 52

Fish & Richardson Trademark & Copyright Thoughts

OCTOBER 5, 2022

Together, they collectively replace inter partes reexamination with inter partes review, becoming available only after the period for post-grant review has passed. Final Rules for Trials before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. patents filed prior to March 16, 2013), since post-grant review is not available for these patents.

Invention 52

Invention Art Litigation Patent 52

LexBlog IP

NOVEMBER 29, 2022

On December 29, 2021, the Beijing Intellectual Property Court (the Court) maintained the validity of CN Invention Patent No. the ’545 patent), which reversed an invalidation decision [1] made by the Patent Reexamination and Invalidation Department of the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA).

Intellectual Property 52

Intellectual Property Invention Art Patent 52

JD Supra Law

DECEMBER 8, 2022

The US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO) terminated a pending ex parte reexamination after finding that the challenger was estopped because the prior art references could have been raised in a prior inter partes review (IPR). In re Tyler, Reexam. 90/014,950 (PTO Nov. By: McDermott Will & Emery

Art 52

Art Trademark Patent 52

LexBlog IP

NOVEMBER 19, 2021

29, 2021), the Patent Trial and Appeal Board affirmed a reexamination examiner’s final rejection of Vivint’s patent claims as unpatentable over prior art. In due course, the Patent Office would have issued a certificate canceling those claims. Appeal 2020-1992 (Fed. presented to the Office.”

Patent 40

Patent Art Government Litigation 40

LexBlog IP

JUNE 22, 2023

Also yesterday, some of the very same senators introduced the Patent Eligibility Restoration Act of 2023. The co-introduction of these bills suggests a plan to drive compromise on patent eligibility. Tech industry than the liberalized 101 standard of the Patent Eligibility Restoration Act. Senators Chris Coons (D-Del.),Thom

Settlement 52

Settlement Litigation Patent Art 52

LexBlog IP

JULY 19, 2021

This statutory design was responsive to the previous criticism of inter partes reexamination estoppel, which attached only after all appeals were exhausted. This unbalanced scenario can be exploited by Patent Owners. First, the Court granted Plaintiff’s motion-in-limine with respect to the prior art reference.

Patent 52

Patent Art Designs Design 52

Larson & Larson

JUNE 1, 2021

It can make you want to tear your hair out if your patent gets rejected, but that won’t help you achieve your dreams. Another step is asking for an interview with the patent examiner to get an explanation. . Some common reasons for rejection include obviousness, lack of novelty, and a lack of patentability.

Patent 52

Patent Public Domain Inventor Invention 52

Fish & Richardson Trademark & Copyright Thoughts

OCTOBER 1, 2021

On September 29, 2021, Senators Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and John Cornyn (R-Texas) introduced the Restoring the America Invents Act “to address problems for small businesses and ordinary Americans caused by poor-quality patents.” Previously Considered Art and Arguments. 103), in addition to printed publication prior art.

Invention 52

Invention Art Litigation Patent 52

LexBlog IP

OCTOBER 12, 2021

the Federal Circuit tackled the question of whether a post-issuance review proceeding (in this case, ex parte reexamination (“EPR”)) was available to a challenger that repeatedly filed another post-issuance review proceeding (in this case, inter partes review (“IPR”)) to forward the very same argument. Background.

Copying 52

Copying Patent Invention Art 52

LexBlog IP

JUNE 20, 2023

For example, the agency cannot require Article III standing for an AIA petition (rejected in legislative history), give deference to previous reexaminations/decisions of the courts (explicitly addressed in AIA estoppel statutes), or foreclose otherwise viable agency options by forced stipulations (explicitly addressed in various AIA statutes).

Litigation 52

Litigation Ownership Patent Inventor 52

Fish & Richardson Trademark & Copyright Thoughts

SEPTEMBER 7, 2021

In the August 2021 edition of our monthly Texas Patent Litigation Monthly Wrap-Up, we cover a case concerning the doctrine of prosecution laches. 2021), the Personalized Media court held that the asserted patent U.S. 8,191,091 (the “’091 Patent”) is unenforceable under the doctrine of prosecution laches. Patent Nos.

Litigation 52

Litigation Patent Patent Application Technology 52

Fish & Richardson Trademark & Copyright Thoughts

SEPTEMBER 16, 2022

Information and statements” may include, among other items, information that “refutes, or is inconsistent with, a position that the applicant takes in” either “opposing an argument of unpatentability relied on by the Office” or “asserting an argument of patentability.”. the party has a duty to submit the information to the USPTO.”.

Patent Prosecution 76

Patent Prosecution Due Diligence Reporting Inventor 76

IP Tech Blog

APRIL 11, 2022

Dynaenergetics Europe GMBH , affirming — on a procedural technicality — a precedential decision of a Precedential Opinion Panel (POP) of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) that granted a motion to amend claims in an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding. LLC , ‘that patent monopolies are kept within their legitimate scope’”.

Art 57

Art Patent Blogging IP 57

IP Tech Blog

OCTOBER 15, 2021

On October 12, 2021, the USPTO extended its program for after-final patent prosecution practice, AFCP 2.0, Reissue applications and applications undergoing reexamination are not eligible for AFCP 2.0 Success also depends on the quality of the initial prior art search that the Examiner did. to September 30, 2022. The post AFCP 2.0

Art 57

Art Patent Prosecution Blogging IP 57