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)
____________________
Category Archives: BRI Standard
PTAB Abandons its Practice of Broadly Interpreting Claims of Challenged Patents in favor of Phillips Standard of “Ordinary and Customary Meaning”
By Tom Engellenner In a final rule published in the Federal Register on October 11, 2018, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) took a remarkable step of acknowledging unfairness in the way its Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) … Continue reading
Posted in BRI Standard, Broadest Reasonable Interpretation, Claim Construction, Covered Business Methods, Inter Partes Review, Phillips standard, Post Grant Review, Trial Tactics, USPTO
Tagged AIA, BRI Standard, CBM, IPR, IPR procedure, PGR, PGR procedure, Phillips standard, PTAB, Rule-making, USPTO
USPTO Proposes Change In Claim Construction Standard For Post-Grant Proceedings
By Reza Mollaaghababa On May 9, 2018, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) issued a notice of proposed rule for changing the standard for construing claims in unexpired patents in inter partes review (IPR), post-grant review (PGR), and transitional covered … Continue reading
Posted in BRI Standard, Broadest Reasonable Interpretation, Claim Construction, Covered Business Methods, Inter Partes Review, Post Grant Review, PTAB Procedure, USPTO
Tagged BRI Standard, broadest reasonable interpretation, CBM, claim construction, Covered Business Methods, inter partes, IPR, PGR, Phillips standard, Post Grant Review, Proposed rule, Rule-making, USPTO
PTAB Issues Guidelines for Motions to Amend
By Reza Mollaaghababa An en banc panel of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) in the case of Aqua Products, Inc. v. Matal recently held that in an inter-partes (IPR) proceeding, the burden of persuasion rests with … Continue reading
Posted in Amendments before the PTAB, America Invents Act, BRI Standard, Broadest Reasonable Interpretation, Claim Construction, Covered Business Methods, Inter Partes Review, Post Grant Review, PTAB Procedure, Trial Tactics, USPTO
Tagged AIA, amendment, Burden of Proof, Covered Business Method, inter partes review, IPR, patents, PGR, Post-Grant
Federal Circuit Slams PTAB Amendment Policy
By Tom Engellenner On October 4, 2017, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, sitting en banc, overruled an earlier panel decision and found that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) had been impermissibly placing the burden of … Continue reading
Posted in Amendments before the PTAB, America Invents Act, BRI Standard, Broadest Reasonable Interpretation, Claim Construction, Court of Appeals Fed Circuit, Covered Business Methods, Federal Circuit, Final PTAB Decision, Inter Partes Review, Post Grant Review, Trial Tactics, USPTO
Tagged AIA, amendment, Appeals from PTAB, Court of Appeals for Federal Circuit, Covered Business Method, Federal Circuit, inter partes, inter partes review, IPR, IPR procedure, Post Grant Review, PTAB
CAFC Finds Another PTAB Claim Construction Unreasonable and Again Reverses an Invalidity Holding
By Reza Mollaaghababa In an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding, the meaning of terms used in challenged claims of an unexpired patent are given their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the claim language and the specification. The Court of … Continue reading
Posted in America Invents Act, Anticipation/Obvious, BRI Standard, Broadest Reasonable Interpretation, Claim Construction, Court of Appeals Fed Circuit, Federal Circuit, Final PTAB Decision, Inter Partes Review, PTAB Procedure, Trial Tactics, USPTO
Tagged anticipation, BRI Standard, broadest reasonable interpretation, claim construction, Federal Circuit, IPR, legal error, reversal
