By Tom Engellenner Two of the earliest challenges to patents under the new post grant proceedings established by the America Invents Act (AIA) are now on appeal to the Court of the Appeals for the Federal Circuit and both appeals are taking direct aim at the US Patent and Trademark Office’s decision to adopt a … Continue reading Does the Broadest Reasonable Interpretation Standard Make Sense?
By Anthony Pisano Patent owners enforcing their rights who seek to exclude testimony about a pending administrative challenge to the patent-in-suit may face a Hobson’s choice – at least in Nevada. Particularly, the price for excluding evidence of pending administrative challenges to a patent may be a loss of the presumption of the patent’s validity … Continue reading What Should A Jury Be Told About A Concurent PTO Trial?
By Ben Snitkoff The regulations implementing Inter Partes Review (“IPR”), as well as Post-Grant Review (“PGR”), allow the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) to join or stay certain proceedings by motion or sua sponte. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.122 (IPR), and 37 C.F.R. § 42.222 (PGR). This provision seems to make a good deal … Continue reading Too Many Cooks in the Kitchen? – PTAB Puts Parallel Reviews By Central Reexam Unit on Hold
By Tom Engellenner On June 11, 2013, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) rendered its first decision in a case under the new AIA procedures for administratively contesting patents. In the case of SAP America, Inc. v. Versata Development Group, Inc., CBM2012-00001, Paper 70 (June 11, 2013), the PTAB found Versata’s patent claims ineligible … Continue reading PTAB Renders Its First Decision