Monthly Archives: February 2014

The PTAB Rules That Time Bar of Section 315(B) Applies Even To Complaints Served Prior To Enactment of AIA

By Reza Mollaaghababa Recently, in Apple. Inc. v. Virnetx, Inc. and Science Application International Corp. (IPR2013-00348), the PTAB found another opportunity to interpret 35 U.S.C. §315(b), a statue of limitations on instituting inter partes review (IPR) proceedings.  Section 315(b) bars … Continue reading

Posted in America Invents Act, Covered Business Methods, District Court, Inter Partes Review, Post Grant Review, PTAB Procedure, Trial Tactics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

The PTAB’s Denial of Patent Owner’s Motion to Amend Underscores the Obstacles that Patent Owners Face In Amending Challenged Claims

By Reza Mollaaghababa As we had reported earlier, a patent owner has a heavy burden in amending claims in an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding.  The recent case of Nichia Corp. v. Emcore Corp. (IPR2012-00005) provides an example of obstacles … Continue reading

Posted in Amendments before the PTAB, America Invents Act, Anticipation/Obvious, Covered Business Methods, Inter Partes Review, Post Grant Review, PTAB Procedure | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , ,

A Declaratory Judgment Action that was Dismissed Without Prejudice Does not Bar the Institution of an IPR

By Reza Mollaaghababa A petition for inter partes review (IPR) will not be granted “if, before the date on which the petition for such a review is filed, the petitioner or the real party in interest filed a civil action … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized

PTAB Strikes Down Patent Claims — Despite Settlement and Request from Parties to Terminate Proceeding

By Tom Engellenner Last week we reported on a case (Blackberry v. MobileMedia Ideas) in which a PTAB panel refused to terminate an inter partes review proceeding with respect to the patent owner despite a settlement reached by the parties.  … Continue reading

Posted in America Invents Act, Anticipation/Obvious, Covered Business Methods, District Court, Estoppel, PTAB Procedure, Trial Tactics, Uncategorized, USPTO | Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

A Ticking Clock – The PTAB Continues to Define What Constitutes a Complaint Alleging Patent Infringement

By Ben Snitkoff The Patent Trial and Appeals Board has released another decision interpreting 35 U.S.C. 315(b), regarding the time bar for filing a petitions for inter partes review (IPR). Specifically, the PTAB has again been asked to interpret what … Continue reading

Posted in America Invents Act, Inter Partes Review, PTAB Procedure | Tagged ,