Category Archives: Experts

PTAB Can Rely on New Evidence Introduced by Petitioner in its Reply

By Tom Engellenner In a decision last month, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit gave petitioners in AIA proceedings yet another weapon to invalidate patents – by affirming a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decision that relied, … Continue reading

Posted in America Invents Act, Anticipation/Obvious, Appeals, Experts, Federal Circuit, Final PTAB Decision, Instittion Decision, Inter Partes Review, PTAB Procedure, Trial Tactics, USPTO | Tagged , , , , , , ,

Lessons From The First Year Of Post Grant Proceedings In The U.S.

By Tom Engellenner Much has occurred during the first year after the America Invents Act (AIA) established several new procedures for the public to challenge issued patents and a new administrative court to hear these cases. Here are some observations … Continue reading

Posted in America Invents Act, Anticipation/Obvious, Covered Business Methods, District Court, Estoppel, Experts, Inter Partes Review, Post Grant Review, PTAB Procedure, Stays, Trial Tactics, Uncategorized, USPTO | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

PTAB Nixes Presentation of Video-Recorded Testimony at Oral Hearing as New Evidence

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 … Continue reading

Posted in America Invents Act, Anticipation/Obvious, Covered Business Methods, Experts, Inter Partes Review, Post Grant Review, PTAB Procedure, Trial Tactics, USPTO | Tagged , , , , , ,

What is Inconsistent Information and When Must Such Information be Disclosed?

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 … Continue reading

Posted in America Invents Act, Anticipation/Obvious, Covered Business Methods, Experts, Inter Partes Review, Post Grant Review, PTAB Procedure, Trial Tactics, USPTO | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

PTAB Issues Guidelines on Foreign Language Testimony

by Tom Engellenner The new AIA post grant proceedings not only authorize depositions but also make provisions for deposing witnesses in a foreign language. Similar to rules that have governed foreign language depositions in PTO interference proceedings (37 C.F.R. 41.157(d)), … Continue reading

Posted in America Invents Act, Anticipation/Obvious, Covered Business Methods, Experts, Inter Partes Review, Post Grant Review, Protective Order, PTAB Procedure, Trial Tactics, Uncategorized, USPTO | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,