Law 360

APRIL 17, 2025

Patent and Trademark Office intends to go through the notice-and-comment rulemaking process for its new procedures allowing its director to decide whether petitions challenging patents at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board should be denied for discretionary reasons, a panel of judges and agency personnel said at a webinar on Thursday.

52

52

Law 360

SEPTEMBER 30, 2024

Patent and Trademark Office Director Kathi Vidal issued a final rule Monday on the agency's process for having the director review certain Patent Trial and Appeal Board decisions, solidifying a mandate laid out by the U.S. Supreme Court three years ago.

Court 52

Court 52

The IP Law Blog

MARCH 17, 2022

When doing so, parties need to actively consider whether they intend that forum selection clause to prohibit filing petitions, such as petitions for inter partes review of patents, with the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”). Patent and Trademark Office ….

Contract 98

Contract Litigating Litigation Cause of Action 98

Patently O

JULY 29, 2021

The NHK-Fintiv Rule provides the PTAB with authority to deny institution of IPR proceedings when the challenged patent is already subject to pending parallel district court litigation. IPR2018-00752, 2018 WL 4373643 (Patent Tr. & IPR2020-00019, 2020 WL 2126495 (Patent Tr. & NHK Spring Co., Intri-Plex Techs., Apple Inc.

Court 72

Court Litigating Litigation Technology 72

Law 360

JUNE 21, 2021

Patent and Trademark Office director the right to review Patent Trial and Appeal Board decisions will require vital guidance from the agency on the front end, even if attorneys say it won't ultimately lead to a dramatic change in proceedings. Supreme Court's ruling Monday giving the U.S.

Court Rules 52

Court Rules Attorney Court 52

Law 360

MAY 17, 2023

An administrative law judge has ordered the U.S.

Administrative Law 52

Administrative Law Attorney Laws 52

Gravel2Gavel

JUNE 22, 2021

The latest case involves a challenge to the Administrative Patent Judges (APJs) who are often called upon to decide patents “worth billions of dollars”. The latest case involves a challenge to the Administrative Patent Judges (APJs) who are often called upon to decide patents “worth billions of dollars”. SUPREME COURT.

Tort 59

Tort Statute Administrative Law Court 59

SCOTUSBlog

JUNE 24, 2021

Share On Monday, the justices ruled 5-4 that the “unreviewable authority” of administrative patent judges meant those APJs were appointed in violation of the Constitution’s appointments clause. Patent and Trademark Office now has the discretion to review those APJ decisions. On appeal, the U.S.

Statute 84

Statute Court Government Laws 84

Patently O

NOVEMBER 29, 2023

by Dennis Crouch The Supreme Court is set to consider several significant patent law petitions addressing a range of issues from the application of obviousness standards, challenges to PTAB procedures, interpretation of joinder time limits IPR, to the proper scope patent eligibility doctrine. Mangrove Partners Master Fund (No.

Prima Facie Case 75

Prima Facie Case Court Laws Technology 75

Patently O

SEPTEMBER 8, 2021

Although the right to arbitrate patent cases is seemingly clear from the FAA, Congress went further in its 1982 PTO appropriations bill to expressly codify the enforcement of arbitration agreements for “any dispute relating to patent validity or infringement.” seeking a declaration of non-infringement of the same patents.

Statute 72

Statute Court Litigation Litigating 72

Patently O

JULY 11, 2024

The petition challenges the Federal Circuit’s application of the statutory limits on the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) authority in inter partes review (IPR) proceedings. UTC owns the patent at issue, U.S. ” See also, Ericsson Inc. Ventures I LLC , 901 F.3d 3d 1374 (Fed.

Laws 61

Laws Court Technology 61

Patently O

DECEMBER 27, 2023

by Dennis Crouch In a non-precedential decision, the Federal Circuit has affirmed a set of PTAB decisions canceling the claims of four patents owned by Carucel Investments L.P. The affected Carucel patents include U.S. Patent Nos. Patent Nos. Carucel”) — finding them invalid as obvious under 35 U.S.C. § Vidal, Nos.

Construction 59

Construction Court Legal Legal 59

Patently O

JULY 26, 2024

Bose , a case where the Federal Circuit concluded that a district court’s final judgment of invalidity had a preclusive effect on USPTO IPR analysis — rendering the patentee Koss’s appeal moot. d), which includes estoppel provisions for petitioners and patent owners respectively. . Case No 23-1005 (Fed.

Technology 45

Technology Court Law School Administrative Law 45

Patently O

JULY 24, 2024

Latty Distinguished Professor of Law and Co-Director, Center for Innovation Policy at Duke Law In a flurry of recent decisions, the Supreme Court has continued its skepticism of administrative agencies. deference to reasonable agency interpretations of ambiguous statutes) in Loper Bright Enterprises v.

Stare Decisis 53

Stare Decisis Administrative Law Construction Laws 53

Patently O

MAY 13, 2024

However, the APA’s Section 553 includes a key caveat: the notice requirement “does not apply— to interpretative rules, general statements of policy, or rules of agency organization, procedure, or practice.” See Dennis Crouch, The Sky’s the Limit: How Chestek Frees the USPTO , Patently-O (Feb. 4th 1105 (Fed.

Statute 64

Statute Court Government Law Firms 64

Patently O

NOVEMBER 29, 2023

Jordan is a third-year law student at the University of Missouri and a registered patent agent. 10,149,820 (the ‘820 patent). Allgenesis petitioned for IPR of all eleven claims of the ’820 patent. The Federal Circuit dismissed Allgenesis’s appeal because Allgenesis failed to establish Article III standing to appeal.

Court 49

Court Finance Attorney Court Decisions 49

Patently O

MARCH 15, 2023

Jordan is a second-year law student at the University of Missouri School of Law and a registered patent agent. Apple and other repeat players in patent infringement litigation often use the inter partes review process under 35 U.S.C. §§ 311–319 to challenge the validity of asserted patents. 35 U.S.C. § 35 U.S.C. §

Statute 64

Statute Litigating Litigation Court 64

Patently O

OCTOBER 3, 2023

by Dennis Crouch The high-stakes patent dispute between VirnetX and Apple continues with VirnetX’s new petition asking the Supreme Court to review two important Federal Circuit rulings. Apple then joined IPRs filed by other challengers, and the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) allowed that joinder despite the time-bar.

Court 53

Court Litigating Litigation Statute 53

Patently O

DECEMBER 7, 2023

by Dennis Crouch Since I have been writing about the pending appeal in In re Xencor , I thought I would keep readers updated on the briefing. As covered in previous posts (here and here), the patent applicant has appealed PTAB rulings that its biotech antibody claims lack sufficient written description support.

Litigation 49

Litigation Litigating Technology Court 49

Patently O

APRIL 19, 2024

Discretion is further indicated by providing the Director unreviewable authority at the institution stage, unlike the trial stage where the PTAB must issue a final written decision that is then appealable. Under the proposal, a patent owner may file a request for discretionary denial separate from its preliminary response.

Statute 45

Statute Litigating Litigation Government 45

Patently O

SEPTEMBER 21, 2022

The PTAB is the busiest patent court in the country. The Board cancels lots of patent claims, but also regularly sides with patentees in the Final Written Decision (at least as to some claims). by Dennis Crouch. ” 35 U.S.C. ” 35 U.S.C. California Inst. Broadcom Ltd., 4th 976, 991 (Fed. Ingenio, Inc. , 1348 (2018).

Statute 58

Statute Construction Litigating Litigation 58

LawSites

DECEMBER 4, 2023

Please review them. Once you have done so, you can FIND THE BALLOT HERE. DEADLINE FOR VOTING IS FRIDAY, DEC. 29, 2023, AT 11:45 P.M. Note: You will be able to cast your ballot just once, and on each ballot, you will be limited to five votes. Most of the startups have also provided a link to a demo video. BriefCatch. Briefpoint. descrybe.ai.

Document Review 135

Document Review Court Reporting Metadata Court Reporter 135

SCOTUSBlog

AUGUST 13, 2021

Share This week we highlight cert petitions that ask the Supreme Court to consider, among other things, the autonomy of faith-based nonprofits to hire only candidates who share their religious beliefs, and Apple’s attempt to shake up the process for contesting patent validity by expanding the jurisdiction of federal courts to hear appeals.

Small Business 111

Small Business Litigating Litigation Technology 111

Patently O

MAY 15, 2024

This wave of RFCs includes significant proposals aimed at adjusting patent fees for fiscal year 2025, refining terminal disclaimer practices, and addressing the impact of artificial intelligence on prior art and patentability. See, Dennis Crouch, USPTO Fees: Targeted Higher Fees to Push for Compact , Patently-O (Apr.

Divorce 45

Divorce Technology Construction Litigation 45

Patently O

MARCH 24, 2022

Guest post by Nina Mendelson , Following one Supreme Court decision posing dangers for the integrity of all sorts of agency adjudication, the ongoing litigation in Arthrex v. That is the question of how much latitude agencies have to operate notwithstanding vacancies in principal officer positions. — Dennis Crouch. Director.”

Statute 78

Statute Court Litigating Litigation 78

FDA Law Blog

JULY 21, 2022

for decades, and patent protections have been cited as a source of “ gamesmanship ” allowing brand companies to keep drug prices high. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) has been relatively absent from these discussions. While the term of the patent is not extended, multiple patents increase litigation burden.

Litigation 98

Litigation Litigating Technology Laws 98

Patently O

JANUARY 19, 2021

Every day Iancu spoke about the storied history of our patent system and its future potential. Every day Iancu spoke about the storied history of our patent system and its future potential. Everywhere I went during my tenure as Director, I received accolades about our agency and its employees. And it is all because of you.

Government 83

Government Laws 83

Patently O

FEBRUARY 5, 2025

by Dennis Crouch USPTO Commissioner for Patents Vaishali Udupa released guidance yesterday regarding the agency’s implementation of President Trump’s return-to-in-person work executive order. Continue reading this post on Patently-O. ” The White House has stated that these CBAs in general are not enforceable.

51

51

SCOTUSBlog

MAY 18, 2023

Maloney , which raises the question whether individual members of Congress have Article III standing to sue an executive agency to compel it to disclose information that the members have requested under 5 U.S.C. The court also noted probable jurisdiction for a one-time relist of a mandatory appeal in a redistricting case, Alexander v.

Administrative Law 97

Administrative Law Depositions Court Contract 97

SCOTUSBlog

OCTOBER 26, 2023

And the correct test to determine whether that has occurred, the state insists, is the one that the lower court applied in this case: the “speedy trial” test outlined in Barker v. Trump once asked the justices to take up the same question that they will now consider in two cases on Oct. And comments by Sen. The police seized their cars.

Government 141

Government Education Court Laws 141

The IP Law Blog

MARCH 19, 2021

Wallach for the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals announced he plans to take senior status on May 31, 2021. The Federal Circuit handles all appeals of patent cases from Districts Courts in the U.S., and appeals from various government agencies. Immunogen, Inc. Health in Motion LLC, et al.

Litigating 52

Litigating Litigation Court Government 52

Patently O

MAY 9, 2025

by Dennis Crouch The Federal Circuit recently affirmed a decision from the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) that refused registration of the mark "US SPACE FORCE" based on false suggestion of a connection with the United States. To continue reading, become a Patently-O member. In re Thomas D. Foster, APC , No.

Law Firm 40

Law Firm Law Firms Attorney Government 40