Page 5 - General Plastic News Today

Monday, April 5, 2021 The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) is an administrative law body of the US Patent and Trademark Office (USTPO) that determines disputes over the issuance, reissuance, and cancellation of patent claims. The PTAB has become well known to patent litigants since the implementation in 2012 of new proceedings, including  Inter Partes Review (IPR), for challenging the patentability of issued patent claims. The Design and Use of IPRs IPRs were designed to be an a...

See Metall Zug AG v. Carl Zeiss Meditec AG, IPR2020-01074, Paper 8 (P.T.A.B. Jan. 5, 2021).  In the earlier proceeding, the PTAB denied the petitioners request to replace its filed petition with a 238 page "unabridged" petition because of the "unabridged" petitions "extraordinary length."  Nearly four months after that denial, the petitioner filed four follow-on petitions challenging the claims of the 330 Patent, including the petition in the IPR2020-01074 proceeding.  The PTAB explained tha...

To embed, copy and paste the code into your website or blog: The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (Patent Office) designated new Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Board) precedents protecting patent owners from multiple inter partes review (IPR) challenges. The Board decisions included one that concerned the identification of a real party in interest (RPI) and when multiple petitions challenging the same patent are not permitted. In RPX Corp. v. Applications in Internet Time, LLC, 1 the Board hel...

APPLICATION OF NHK/FINTIV ANALYSIS CONTINUES TO EVOLVE The Board’s application of its precedential NHK and Fintiv decisions to deny petitions based on parallel litigation continues to develop. The Board recently designated two decisions as precedential as to the sections that relate to application of the Fintiv factors: Sotera Wireless, Inc. v. Masimo Corp., IPR2020-01019, Paper 12 (December 1, 2020) (precedential as to § II.A) — The Board held that a Petitioner’s broad stipulation no...

To embed, copy and paste the code into your website or blog: The PTAB’s denial of Apple’s attempt to join Microsoft’s IPR suggests increased hurdles for copycat petitions. TAKEAWAYS Serial petitions will be heavily scrutinized and often denied using the General Plastic factors, even when the second petition seeks to join a previously instituted trial. The PTO is considering promulgating rules governing discretionary denials, and sought public comments for such rules, (85 Reg. 66502) which...

RPX focuses on real party in interest and the 35 U.S.C. § 315(b) time bar. Here, the Chief, Deputy Chief, and Vice Chief Judge of the Board issued the decision. In terminating and IPR, the Board noted that the Federal Circuit remanded this case after holding the petitioner was time-barred because the petitioner’s client was an unnamed real party-in-interest that had been served with an infringement complaint more than one year before filing the petition.

Introduction The authors have recently proposed alternative analyses for the discretionary denial of IPR and PGR petitions involved in parallel district court litigation, as well as for the discretionary denial of serial petitions filed before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”). The PTAB is also currently at a crossroads with yet a third similar but distinct issue—the discretionary denial of parallel petitions filed before the PTAB. “Serial petitions” refer to multiple succes...

To embed, copy and paste the code into your website or blog: A weekly summary of the precedential patent-related opinions issued by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and the opinions designated precedential or informative by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. RPX Corp. v. Applications in Internet Time, LLC, No. IPR2015-01750 (PTAB Oct. 2, 2020) (designated precedential on Dec. 4, 2020). Opinion by Boalick, joined by Bonilla and Weidenfeller. On remand from the Federal Circuit, the Pa...