The battle over foundational CRISPR-Cas9 patent rights has reached another milestone. In March 2026, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) reaffirmed its priority determination in favor of the Broad Institute in Interference No. 106,115, concluding once again that the
The first half of 2025 has brought many changes at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”), including policy changes at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”). At the end of March 2025, the issuance of the Interim
Introduction
Acting Director of the USPTO, Coke Morgan Stewart, issued a memorandum last week that will change the way petitioners levy challenges to patents via inter partes review (IPR).[1] The change will apply to any petition for IPR
The USPTO’s recent guidance on discretionary denials has shifted patent practitioners back to the Fintiv and Sotera Wireless framework.
The Prior Framework: Fintiv & Sotera Wireless
In Apple Inc. v. Fintiv, Inc., No. IPR2020-00019 (PTAB Mar. 20, 2020), the Patent
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) recently designated its decision in Cambridge v. Sfara (IPR2024-00952) as an informative decision.[1] This designation addresses an important issue in inter partes review (IPR) proceedings: inconsistent claim construction arguments between district court
The Federal Circuit’s holding in United Servs. Auto. Ass’n v. PNC Bank N.A., No. 2023-2171, 2025 WL 339662 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 30, 2025) reversed a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) decision finding no motivation to combine. The opinion is
On March 4, 2025, the Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (“PTAB”) decision in Restem, LLC v. Jadi Cell, LLC, No. 23-2054, 2025 WL 679195, at *1 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 4, 2025), finding that the patent challenger
On Friday, February 28, 2025, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) announced the withdrawal of the June 2022 memorandum titled “Interim Procedure for Discretionary Denials in AIA Post-Grant Proceedings with Parallel District Court Litigation,” which had been issued
On January 27, 2025, the Federal Circuit held that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) “has jurisdiction over IPRs concerning expired patents.” See Apple Inc. v. Gesture Tech. Partners, LLC, 2025 WL 299939, *2 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 27, 2025).
The Federal Circuit’s recent decision in Palo Alto Networks, Inc. v. Centripetal Networks, LLC, No. 2023-1636, 2024 WL 5114204 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 16, 2024) concerns an obviousness determination based on a motivation to combine. Below is a discussion of the
