Home | Patent Trial and Appeal Board Digest

Recent Decisions (click on a decision to view the annotation)

Riverbed Technology Inc. v. Silver Peak Systems, Inc.

In response to an opposed motion, the Board weighed confidentiality needs against disclosure of information allegedly at the heart of the proceeding and conditionally granted the motion to seal a source code exhibit.

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. v. Black Hills Media, LLC

Board granted Petitioner's motion to compel discovery of Patent Owner's declarant in order to investigate real-party-in-interest. The Board also rejected Patent Owner's attempts to withdraw the declaration to avoid deposition of the declarant.

Google Inc. v. SimpleAir, Inc.

Board attacked the sufficiency of Petitioner's arguments and found the claims to be patent eligible.

Google Inc. v. SimpleAir, Inc.

Board held that the Miyazaki standard for indefiniteness applies to its proceedings.

TD Ameritrade Holding Corp. v. Trading Technologies International, Inc.

Board allowed Patent Owner to cross-examine translator regarding accuracy of Petitioner's translation despite Petitioner's objections.

Zhongshan Broad Ocean Motor Co., Ltd., et al. v. Nidec Motor Corporation

The Board found no clerical error for the omission of an attesting affidavit because the error was on the part of a person who had a duty 'to exercise original thought or judgment' in the matter.

Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC v. Velocity Patent, LLC

Board denied motion to stay institution of IPR until termination of co-pending ex parte reexamination because doing so would not provide a "speedy" resolution of the IPR.

Yahoo! Inc. v. CreateAds LLC

Board denied Patent Owner's late request to change trial date due to backup counsel's unavailability.

Par Pharmaceutical, Inc., Roxane Laboratories, Inc. and Amneal Pharmaceuticals, LLC v. Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

The Board required that the claims and not just the specification must have a financial component for the patent to qualify for CBM review.

Par Pharmaceutical, Inc., Roxane Laboratories, Inc. and Amneal Pharmaceuticals, LLC v. Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

The Board held that because a method is "used in commerce" is insufficient to show it qualifies for CBM review.

About the Editors

Analysis

Executive Editors:

Wayne Stacy | Orion Armon

Wayne Stacy and Orion Armon

Contributing Editors:

It's easy to create a free account that provides access to the entire database.

Resources