Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance

Jurisdiction

Work area

Firm name

Date from

Date to

Results: 1-10 of 4,305

Federal Circuit Reverses, i.e. Overturns, Board’s Anticipation Decision Due to Overbroad Claim Construction

Marshall Gerstein & Borun LLP
USA
August 13 2018

In TF3 Ltd. v. Tre Milano, LLC, Appeal 2016-2285 (Fed. Cir. July 13, 2018), the Federal Circuit reversed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s final

Relevant Public, Not General Public, When Determining Availability of Printed Publication

Jones Day
USA
August 9 2018

On July 27, 2018, the Federal Circuit reversed the PTAB’s finding that Petitioner GoPro, Inc. failed to establish the public availability of an

Using Theses as Prior Art at the PTAB

Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, PC
USA
August 7 2018

Based on recent Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB” or “the Board”) decisions, the best practice to establish an academic thesis as a printed

PTAB Institutes a Second IPR on Rituxan-related ’821 Patent

Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, PC
USA
August 1 2018

The PTAB recently instituted a second IPR of US Patent 9,296,821 (“the ’821 patent”), which covers certain uses of Rituxan (rituximab), a monoclonal

Publication Need not be IndexedSearchable to be Prior Art

Ropes & Gray LLP
USA
July 31 2018

Last week, I pointed out that the Federal Circuit faulted the Patent Trial & Appeal Board (PTAB) for its narrow public accessibility analysis in

PTAB Upholds GILENYA Method of Treatment Patent, Prompting New ANDA Litigation

Jones Day
USA
July 30 2018

In Apotex Inc. v. Novartis AG, IPR2017-00854, Paper 109 (Jul. 11, 2018), the PTAB held that the claims of U.S. Patent No. 9,187,405 were not

Zup, LLC. V. Nash Manufacturing, Inc.

Knobbe Martens
USA
July 26 2018

Before Frost, Newman, and Lawrie. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. Summary: A weak

Printed Publications & The PTAB

Ropes & Gray LLP
USA
July 26 2018

Yesterday I highlighted a significant decision for Patent Trial & Appeal Board (PTAB) practitioners pertaining to Real-Party-In-Interest (RPI) and

Are Online Videos "Publicly Accessible"?

Jones Day
USA
July 25 2018

The decision in HVLP02 LLC v. Oxygen Frog turned on whether or not a YouTube video could qualify as a "printed publication," and therefore

325(d) for 101 CBM Petition

Jones Day
USA
July 25 2018

The PTAB’s decision on whether or not to institute trial in a particular matter is discretionary. See Harmonic Inc. v. Avid Tech, Inc., 815 F.3d 1356

Current Search

Refine

Content type

Tags