AIA On-Sale Bar Applies to Publicized Sales, Even When Knowledge of Sale Did Not Disclose the Underlying Invention

By Reza Mollaaghababa The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) recently construed the on-sale bar provision of 35 U.S.C. 102(a) in a way that will make it easier for petitioners to challenge third party patents. While in an inter-partes review proceeding, a petitioner can rely only on prior art patents and printed publications … Continue reading 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

By Yue (Joy) Wang IPR petitioners wary of the statutory estoppel under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2) may have reason to be cautiously optimistic.   Judge Sue Robinson of the Federal District Court of Delaware recently held that Toshiba is not estopped from presenting invalidity grounds at trial that it did not raise in an earlier IPR. … Continue reading IPR Estoppel Provisions May Not Be That Scary After All

A Decision Not to Institute a Trial at the PTAB Does Not Carry Much Weight in Federal Court

By Tom Engellenner Two recent cases show that simply avoiding a post-grant review proceeding at the U.S. Patent Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) not only does not preclude a defendant in underlying patent infringement litigation in a federal district court from raising the same invalidity arguments again, it also may not even influence … Continue reading A Decision Not to Institute a Trial at the PTAB Does Not Carry Much Weight in Federal Court