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
- PTAB Abandons its Practice of Broadly Interpreting Claims of Challenged Patents in favor of Phillips Standard of “Ordinary and Customary Meaning”
- Attorney General’s Office May Weigh In on Constitutionality of IPRs involving Pre-AIA Patents
- CAFC Reverses PTAB on §315(b) Petition Time Bar Interpretation
- CAFC Affirms PTAB’s Decision That Printed Matter Doctrine Can Be Used In Claim Construction
- Once The Federal Circuit Affirms A PTAB Finding Of Invalidity, Collateral Estoppel Prevents Patent Owner From Asserting The Claims In Any Further Proceeding
Past Posts
- October 2018 (1)
- September 2018 (1)
- August 2018 (1)
- June 2018 (1)
- May 2018 (2)
- April 2018 (4)
- March 2018 (1)
- February 2018 (1)
- January 2018 (1)
- December 2017 (2)
- September 2017 (1)
- 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: October 2013
Stranger in a Strange Land – USPTO Clarifies Rules for Pro Hac Vice Admission
By Ben Snitkoff The new Inter Partes Review (“IPR”) and Post-Grant Review (“PGR”) procedures are similar to district court litigation in many respects: there are opportunities for discovery, depositions, adverse motion practice, and a trial. As such, many participants in … Continue reading
Posted in America Invents Act, Inter Partes Review, PTAB Procedure, Uncategorized
Tagged inter partes review, pro hac vice, PTAB
A Patent Owner Bears a Heavy Burden in Amending Claims in an IPR Proceeding
By Reza Mollaaghababa A patent owner in an inter-partes review (IPR) proceeding may amend a challenged patent if they satisfy a number of statutory requirements set forth by the AIA (America Invents Act) and the regulations promulgated by the USPTO. … Continue reading
Posted in America Invents Act, Inter Partes Review, PTAB Procedure
Tagged amendment, claims, inter partes review
No Fishing Allowed – Limits on Discovery Before the PTAB
By Anthony Pisano The addition of discovery to review proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), such as inter partes review, and post-grant review, have opened up the doors to new kind of challenges before the PTO. However, … Continue reading
Posted in America Invents Act, Covered Business Methods, Inter Partes Review, Post Grant Review, PTAB Procedure, Trial Tactics
Tagged AIA, America Invents Act, Covered Business Methods, discovery, inter partes review, IPR, IPR procedure, litigation stay, patents, post grant, Post-Grant, PTAB, trial practice, USPTO
The More the Merrier – Joinder under the AIA
By Ben Snitkoff Under the America Invents Act (AIA), parties to an Inter Partes Review (IPR) or Post Grant Review (PGR) may move to join pending IPR or PGR proceedings. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.122 (for IPR), and 37 C.F.R. … Continue reading
Posted in America Invents Act, Estoppel, Inter Partes Review, PTAB Procedure
Tagged AIA, estoppel, Joinder
