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
- SUPREME COURT HOLDS THAT AIA ON-SALE BAR APPLIED TO SECRET SALES
- YEAR IN REVIEW: CHANGES IN PTAB PRACTICE IN 2018
- 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
Past Posts
- January 2019 (2)
- 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: One-year Statutory Bar
SUPREME COURT HOLDS THAT AIA ON-SALE BAR APPLIED TO SECRET SALES
Posted on January 28, 2019 by PostGrant-Counsel.com | Inter Partes Review, Reexam and other Challenges to Issued Patents
By Reza Mollaaghababa In an inter-partes review proceeding (IPR), a challenger can rely only on patents and printed publications to challenge the validity of a patent claim. In contrast, in a post grant review (PGR) proceeding, a challenger can rely … Continue reading →
Posted in Amendments before the PTAB, America Invents Act, Appeals, Court of Appeals Fed Circuit, Covered Business Methods, Federal Circuit, Inter Partes Review, Lack of Written Description, On-Sale BAR, One-year Statutory Bar, Patent Eligible Subject Matter, Post Grant Review, Printed Matter Doctrine, PTAB Procedure, PTAB Trial Practice Guide, Supreme Court, Trial Tactics, USPTO
|
Tagged amendment, America Invents Act, Court of Appeals for Federal Circuit, Federal Circuit, On-Sale BAR, One-year Statutory Bar, Supreme Court
PTAB Panels Are Divided Regarding Interpretation Of The Joinder Provision
Posted on April 6, 2015 by PostGrant-Counsel.com | Inter Partes Review, Reexam and other Challenges to Issued Patents
By Reza Mollaaghababa The America Invents Act (AIA) allows a petitioner to request joinder of an inter partes review (IPR) of a patent with an IPR proceeding previously instituted with respect to that patent so long as the request for … Continue reading →
Posted in America Invents Act, Covered Business Methods, Inter Partes Review, One-year Statutory Bar, Post Grant Review, PTAB Procedure, Trial Tactics, USPTO
|
Tagged AIA, America Invents Act, inter partes, inter partes review, IPR, IPR procedure, Joinder, post grant, Post-Grant, PTAB, trial practice, USPTO
Stanford Patent Found Invalid in IPR proceedings but Licensee’s IP Survives
Posted on November 30, 2014 by PostGrant-Counsel.com | Inter Partes Review, Reexam and other Challenges to Issued Patents
By Tom Engellenner In a decision this month (IPR2013-00308), the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has ruled against Stanford University’s patented method for detecting Down’s syndrome and other chromosomal defects, finding all of the challenged claims 1-13 invalid. The … Continue reading →
Posted in America Invents Act, Anticipation/Obvious, District Court, Inter Partes Review, One-year Statutory Bar, Post Grant Review, PTAB Procedure, Stays, Trial Tactics, USPTO
|
Tagged AIA, America Invents Act, Ariosa, Bad Patents, District Court, Ilumina, inter partes, inter partes review, IPR, IPR procedure, patents, post grant, Post-Grant, PTAB, Stanford, stay, stay factors, trial practice, USPTO, Verinata
If at First You Don’t Succeed: File, File And File Again
Posted on July 19, 2014 by PostGrant-Counsel.com | Inter Partes Review, Reexam and other Challenges to Issued Patents
By Tom Engellenner Petitioners seeking to invalidate patents via the new AIA inter partes review (“IPR”) proceedings at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) appear to be increasingly willing to file multiple petitions against the same patent. In several … Continue reading →
Posted in America Invents Act, Anticipation/Obvious, Covered Business Methods, Inter Partes Review, One-year Statutory Bar, Post Grant Review, PTAB Procedure, Trial Tactics, Uncategorized, USPTO
|
Tagged AIA, America Invents Act, Covered Business Methods, inter partes, inter partes review, IPR, IPR procedure, One-year Statutory Bar, Post-Grant, trial practice, USPTO
