By Griffin Mesmer The United States Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”) is quickly becoming a popular forum for parties who have been accused of patent infringement. A defendant can challenge the validity of an asserted patent by filing a petition for inter partes review (“IPR”) with the PTO while the infringement suit is pending in … Continue reading Differing Approaches to Stays of Co-Pending Litigation
By Tom Engellenner The new AIA procedures for administratively challenging issued patents afford the parties an opportunity to present their cases at a “final oral hearing” before the three Administrative Patent Judge panel that will decide the case. This is true for inter partes review (IPR), covered business method (CBM) review and post grant review … Continue reading PTAB Nixes Presentation of Video-Recorded Testimony at Oral Hearing as New Evidence
By Kelly E. Rose As we’ve previously discussed, the inter partes review (IPR) and post grant review (PGR) procedures in the USPTO allow for parties to take discovery. Specifically, Rule 42.51 enumerates the permitted categories of discovery, including: (a) mandatory initial disclosures, (b) routine discovery and (c) additional discovery. Of particular interest is a subcategory … Continue reading What is Inconsistent Information and When Must Such Information be Disclosed?