About PostGrant-Counsel.com
PostGrant-Counsel.com is published by members of Pepper Hamilton LLP's patent review team. With backgrounds in patent prosecution and litigation across many industries, the team members concentrate their practices on challenging and defending patents after they have been issued, e.g., in inter partes review and the soon-to-be-implemented “post-grant” review as well as in corresponding proceedings in Europe, Japan and elsewhere. This experience enables the team to provide clients with counseling, advice and representation when they are contemplating a challenge to an issued patent – or when they may need to defend their own patent against a post-grant challenge.Subscribe Via RSS
Subscribe by E-mail
Suggest A Topic
Blogroll
-
Recent Posts
- Federal Circuit Criticizes PTAB for Failing to Properly Weigh Objective Evidence of Non-Obviousness
- CAFC Finds Another PTAB Claim Construction Unreasonable and Again Reverses an Invalidity Holding
- PTAB Can Rely on New Evidence Introduced by Petitioner in its Reply
- AIA On-Sale Bar Applies to Publicized Sales, Even When Knowledge of Sale Did Not Disclose the Underlying Invention
- IPR Estoppel Provisions May Not Be That Scary After All
Past Posts
- August 2017 (2)
- July 2017 (1)
- May 2017 (1)
- February 2017 (2)
- January 2017 (1)
- October 2016 (1)
- September 2016 (1)
- August 2016 (1)
- July 2016 (1)
- June 2016 (2)
- April 2016 (2)
- March 2016 (2)
- February 2016 (2)
- January 2016 (3)
- December 2015 (2)
- September 2015 (1)
- July 2015 (3)
- April 2015 (3)
- January 2015 (1)
- December 2014 (1)
- November 2014 (1)
- October 2014 (1)
- August 2014 (1)
- July 2014 (2)
- June 2014 (1)
- May 2014 (1)
- April 2014 (1)
- February 2014 (5)
- January 2014 (4)
- December 2013 (1)
- November 2013 (3)
- October 2013 (4)
- September 2013 (4)
- August 2013 (2)
- July 2013 (7)
- June 2013 (5)
- May 2013 (5)
____________________
Monthly Archives: July 2013
Protecting Confidential Information at the PTAB – Part 2
By Ben Snitkoff As discussed in Part 1, unlike in reexaminations, in an inter partes review, a protective order is available to parties seeking to keep their confidential information sealed from public view. Despite the availability and relative ease of … Continue reading
Posted in America Invents Act, Inter Partes Review, Protective Order
Tagged Confidential, inter partes review, Protective Order
Reexamination Obliterates a $24 Million Verdict
By Reza Mollaaghababa The administrative proceedings for challenging patents, including new proceedings enacted by America Invents Act (Inter Partes Review, Post Grant Review, and Business Method Review), can be potent tools for exerting considerable leverage against patentees. A third party … Continue reading
Posted in District Court, Federal Circuit, Trial Tactics
Hold’em or Fold’em? – So Far Patent Owners Show Little Interest In Settling IPR Proceedings
By Tom Engellenner When Congress enacted the America Invents Act (AIA) and created the new administrative proceedings for challenging patents (Inter Partes Review, Post Grant Review and Covered Business Method Review), the AIA provided an incentive for the parties to … Continue reading
Posted in America Invents Act, Covered Business Methods, Inter Partes Review, Post Grant Review, Protective Order, PTAB Procedure, Trial Tactics, USPTO
Tagged AIA, America Invents Act, Covered Business Methods, inter partes review, IPR, IPR procedure, patents, post grant, Post-Grant, PTAB, Reexamination, settlement, trial practice, USPTO
Stay of a Permanent Injunction Pending
By Ben Snitkoff On June 27, 2013, Judge Zobel, in the District of Massachusetts, issued a post-trial order granting a permanent injunction, but stayed that injunction pending resolution of a co-pending reexamination before the Patent and Trademark Office. This case … Continue reading
Posted in America Invents Act, District Court, Injunctive Relief, Inter Partes Review, Trial Tactics
Tagged AIA, District Court, Injunction, Reexamination
Using Experts in AIA Inter Partes Review Proceedings – Part 1
By Tom Engellenner Although an “expert opinion” in the form of a declaration is not a mandatory part of a petition for patent review under the new AIA proceedings (i.e., inter partes review, CBM review or post-grant review), opinions of … Continue reading
Posted in America Invents Act, Anticipation/Obvious, Experts, Inter Partes Review, Post Grant Review, PTAB Procedure, Trial Tactics, USPTO
Tagged AIA, America Invents Act, Covered Business Methods, expert declarants, expert declarations, expert opinions, expert testimony, experts, inter partes review, IPR, IPR procedure, post grant, Post-Grant, PTAB, trial practice
