Tag Archives: Post-Grant

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 , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Estoppel Does Not Attach When Petitioner’s Grounds Are Denied As Redundant

By Reza Mollaaghababa Under 35 U.S.C. 315(e)(1), a petitioner in an inter partes review of a claim in a patent that has resulted in a final written decision by the Board may not request or maintain a proceeding before the … Continue reading

Posted in America Invents Act, Anticipation/Obvious, Court of Appeals Fed Circuit, Estoppel, Instittion Decision, Inter Partes Review, Trial Tactics, USPTO | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

New Final Rules for Post-Grant Proceedings Published by USPTO on April Fools Day

By Tom Engellenner The USPTO has gone ahead and finalized new rules for post-grant proceedings under the America Invents Act (AIA) – despite heavy criticism that the rules do little to alter the lopsided nature of these proceedings. The new … Continue reading

Posted in America Invents Act, Covered Business Methods, Instittion Decision, Inter Partes Review, Post Grant Review, PTAB Procedure, Trial Tactics, USPTO | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Patent Trial and Appeal Board Adds Two More Cases to its List of Precedential and Informative Decisions

By Tom Engellenner Earlier this month, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) added two decisions to its list of “precedential” opinions for the USPTO’s new proceedings for challenging patents under the America Invents Act. The list (which now consists … Continue reading

Posted in America Invents Act, Covered Business Methods, Estoppel, Inter Partes Review, Post Grant Review, PTAB Procedure | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

No Second Bite Of The Apple for Square, Inc. – PTAB Applies Estoppel Provision Of 35 U.S.C. §325(e)(1) TO CBM Review

By Reza Mollaaghababa In the case of Square, Inc. v. Unwired Planet, LLC (CMB2015-00148), the PTAB held that the grounds raised by Square, Inc. (Petitioner) to challenge the validity of claims 1-4 of Unwired Planet’s U.S. Patent No. 7,711,100 could … Continue reading

Posted in America Invents Act, Anticipation/Obvious, Covered Business Methods, Estoppel, Post Grant Review, PTAB Procedure, USPTO | Tagged , , , , , ,