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.


Refine your search

Content type


Firm name


473 results found


Ropes & Gray LLP | USA | 14 Oct 2018

Invalidity Contentions as IPR Estoppel Markers

Invalidity Contentions Serve as Estoppel Benchmark A Patent Owner may only avail itself of an IPR estoppel defense in court upon demonstrating that a


Jones Day | USA | 5 Jun 2018

File It: Motion for Remand in View of SAS Institute

We have previously discussed the ramifications of the Supreme Court’s decision in SAS Institute, Inc. v. Iancu, which held that the PTAB cannot


Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP | USA | 2 Apr 2018

Judge Matsumoto Declines to Hear Invalidity Arguments on Patent Previously Cancelled in IPR

On March 27, 2018, District Judge Matsumoto (E.D.N.Y.) issued an 83-page decision on the parties' summary judgment briefing, which covered ten issues


S.S. Rana & Co | Bangladesh, Global | 1 Mar 2018

Trademark enforcement in Bangladesh

A structured guide to trademark enforcement laws in Bangladesh


Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP | USA | 30 Oct 2017

4 Out of 5 IPRs Ain’t Bad: Judge Oetken Grants Motion to Stay Pending Resolution of IPR Proceedings Despite Advanced Stage of Litigation

On October 27, 2016, District Judge J. Paul Oetken (S.D.N.Y.) granted defendant Comcast Corp.'s ("Comcast") motion to stay the case pending resolution


Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, PC | USA | 16 Aug 2017

Discretion and Precedential Decisions at the PTAB

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) enjoys a wide range of discretion on a number of issues. For instance, the PTAB has interpreted 35 U.S.C


Marshall Gerstein & Borun LLP | USA | 7 Jul 2017

Look to the Claims for Estoppel

In three recent decisions, the Federal Circuit reiterated the importance of determining estoppel in PTAB proceedings on a claim-by-claim basis. In the


Baker & Hostetler LLP | USA | 20 Apr 2017

Darwinian Insurance

This case demonstrates the need for providers to know and follow the notification provisions set forth in their insurance policies in order to avoid


Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP | USA | 20 Jun 2016

Judge Briccetti Stays Patent Case Against a Customer Pending Resolution of Lawsuit Against Supplier

On June 3, 2016, District Judge Vincent L. Briccetti (S.D.N.Y.) stayed a patent infringement action brought by plaintiff Marine Travelift (“Marine”)


Marshall Gerstein & Borun LLP | USA | 12 Apr 2016

Without Estoppel, Are Redundant Grounds Now a Petitioner’s Friend?

The Federal Circuit recently confirmed the Board’s interpretation that 315(e) estoppel does not take effect with respect to prior art that the

Previous page 1 2 3 ...