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.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 3,810

Aqua Products Levels the Playing Field at the PTAB
  • Latham & Watkins LLP
  • USA
  • October 18 2017

The Federal Circuit’s long-awaited en banc opinion in Aqua Products, Inc. v. Matal marks a significant change in the treatment of motions to amend


Littler Global Guide - Philippines - Q3 2017
  • Littler Mendelson PC
  • Philippines
  • October 12 2017

The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) (sitting en banc) recently clarified that, within the context of disputes undergoing mandatory


Aqua Products Dissent Would Keep Burden for Amendments on Patent Owners
  • Marshall Gerstein & Borun LLP
  • USA
  • October 12 2017

As discussed here, the en banc Federal Circuit vacated and remanded the PTAB’s decision in Aqua Products, Inc. v. Matal, determining that the PTAB


Shifting Seas in Aqua Products as the Federal Circuit Eases the Burden of Amendment in IPR
  • Wolf Greenfield & Sacks PC
  • USA
  • October 11 2017

To many patent owners in IPR, the prospect of a patent-saving claim amendment is all but illusory. The Board grants few motions to amend, which is one


Federal Circuit Shifts Burdens for Motions to Amend
  • Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney PC
  • USA
  • October 10 2017

On October 4, 2017, the Federal Circuit, sitting en banc, issued its long-awaited decision in Aqua Products, Inc. v. Matal. Appeal No. 2015-1177. The


Aqua Products, Inc. v. Matal: Petitioners Bear the Burden of Establishing the Unpatentability of Amended Claims in IPR Proceedings
  • Paul Hastings LLP
  • USA
  • October 10 2017

Upending the current motion-to-amend practice before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“the PTAB”), a deeply fractured en banc Federal Circuit in


En banc Federal Circuit holds that Petitioner has the burden to prove unpatentability for amended claims added during IPR
  • Sughrue Mion PLLC
  • USA
  • October 10 2017

In Aqua Products, Inc., v. Matal, 2015-1177, Oct. 4, 2017, the en banc Federal Circuit cut against the grain of current PTAB proceeding and held that


Federal Circuit Places The Burden Of Persuasion For Motions To Amend In IPRs On Petitioners
  • Knobbe Martens
  • USA
  • October 9 2017

The Federal Circuit issued an en banc decision instructing the PTAB to assess patentability of amended claims in IPR proceedings without placing the


Federal Circuit Rejects Requirement That Patent Owners Have the Burden to Prove the Patentability of Amended Claims Proffered During Inter Partes Review Proceedings
  • Squire Patton Boggs
  • European Union, USA
  • October 9 2017

The Federal Circuit has issued its long-awaited ruling in Aqua Products, Inc. v. Matal, No. 2015-1177, with the majority of the en banc court agreeing


Burden of Proving Unpatentability of Amended Claims Placed on IPR Petitioners
  • Jones Day
  • USA
  • October 9 2017

In an en banc decision, the Federal Circuit in Aqua Products, Inc. v. Matal addressed the question of who bears the burden of proving that claims