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 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