On Wednesday March 18, 2020, the Federal Circuit held that the first decision released by Director Iancu and the USPTO Precedential Opinion Panel (“POP”), in Proppant Express Investments, LLC v. Oren Techs., LLC, was incorrect. The Federal Circuit found
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board issued 47 IPR and CBM Final Written Decisions in January, including decisions following remands from the Federal Circuit, cancelling 515 (81.10%) instituted claims while declining to cancel 120 (18.90%) instituted claims. Patent owners did
According to 35 U.S.C. §315(e)(1) and (2), a petitioner in an inter partes review (IPR) that results in a final written decision (FWD) may not raise in the USPTO or a civil action or an ITC proceeding “any ground that
Here is a listing of the AIA Blog’s top five posts in 2019:Read more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board issued 27 IPR and CBM Final Written Decisions in December, including decisions following remands from the Federal Circuit, cancelling 292 (70.19%) instituted claims while declining to cancel 104 (25.00%) instituted claims. Patent owners conceded
In a relatively difficult month for patent owners, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board issued 27 IPR and CBM Final Written Decisions in November, including decisions following remands from the Federal Circuit, cancelling 335 (87.47%) instituted claims while declining to
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) cannot recover the salaries of its legal personnel in actions under 35 USC § 145. The Supreme Court came to that conclusion in Peter v. NantKwest, Inc., No. 18-801 (Dec. 11, 2019)—the
Introduction
The America Invents Act (“AIA”), signed into law on September 16, 2011, created two types of post-grant proceedings: inter partes reviews (IPRs) and post-grant reviews (PGRs).1 Enough time has now passed to be able to look at PGR
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board issued 29 IPR and CBM Final Written Decisions in October, including decisions following remands from the Federal Circuit, cancelling 395 (79.80%) instituted claims while declining to cancel 100 (20.20%) instituted claims. Patent owners did
If the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) determines that a petitioner has filed its IPR petition too late, can the petitioner appeal that determination? The Supreme Court will answer that question this term in Thryv, Inc. v. Click-to-Call Techs.,
