We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
In cooperation with Association of Corporate Counsel
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 11-20 of 968

Timeliness the devil is in the details (a.k.a. Rules)

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 29 2014

In an order issued by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board), the Board expunged exhibits from the records of five related cases on the

Inventor testimony without corroborating evidence is insufficient to prove of reduction to practice

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 29 2014

Addressing the sufficiency of corroborating evidence to prove earlier reduction to practice, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) found that an

PTAB denies motion to amend for failure to show patentability

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 29 2014

Addressing a patent owner’s motion to amend by cancelling claims and substituting claims, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and

“Soda-pop” bottle caps can be analogous art for flash chromatography cartridges

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 29 2014

Addressing the issue of analogous art in the context of inter partes reexamination, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a

Method implemented on generic computers is not patent eligible, but method for processing paper checks is

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 29 2014

In a pair of Covered Business Method (CBM) decisions, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) illustrated

PTAB clarifies permissible use of documents and evidence

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 29 2014

In two recent Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceedings, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) addressed the scope

Patent owner must prove patentability of proposed amended claims (including prior art date)

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 29 2014

In an order addressing a motion for a sur-reply to introduce evidence to antedate a prior art reference in an Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceeding

No collateral attacks on stay decision pending completion of CBM review

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 29 2014

Addressing a motion to stay district court litigation pending a Covered Business Method (CBM) review, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal

IPR depositions: civility and decorum must prevail

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 29 2014

In an order regarding deposition conduct and decorum, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) granted patent

Specificity and negotiation are the buzz words for IPR discovery

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 29 2014

Addressing a patent owner’s request for additional discovery, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Board) denied the