Cases

Loading data, please wait...

Topics

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

PTAB Digest

Apple, Inc. v. Core Wireless Licensing S.A.R.L.

The Board held that a reference was prior art because a preponderance of evidence showed that it was indexed by title and subject matter before the priority date of the challenged claims.
PTAB Digest

Ex Parte Jennifer Schweickert

The Federal Circuit reversed the Board's obviousness findings because the Board had not adequately explained why a person of ordinary skill in the art would have combined the teachings of the prior art.
PTAB Digest

Verinata Health, Inc. v. Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc.

District court held that estoppel applied even though the PTAB disposed of IPR on evidentiary grounds because the PTAB issued a final written decision addressing the merits.
PTAB Digest

Verinata Health, Inc. v. Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc.

Applying Shaw, the District Court held that statutory estoppel bars the petitioner, real party-in-interest, and privy from asserting invalidity grounds raised, or that reasonably could have been raised, during IPRs of the patents-in-suit.
PTAB Digest

Verinata Health, Inc. v. Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc.

District court foud that invalidity grounds that weren't instituted by the PTAB were not estopped, but found estopped invalidity grounds that were a subset of those considered by the PTAB.
PTAB Digest

Verinata Health, Inc. v. Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc.

District court held that estoppel applied to a party that bought the petitioner after IPR institution because acquirer was aware of the IPR during acquisition and because it was named a real-party-in-interest to the IPR.
PTAB Digest

Verinata Health, Inc. v. Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc.

District court held that Defendant's arguments in favor of a stay, which overstated the breadth of IPR estoppel, did not warrant a finding that petitioner was judicially estopped from raising non-estopped invalidity defenses in district court.
PTAB Digest

Spectrum Brands, Inc. v. Assa Abloy AB

The Board found that Patent Owner had received sufficient notice of which prior art teachings were relied on for obviousness despite the Board's recasting of the rejections because the prior art teachings were identified in the Institution Decision.
PTAB Digest

Legend3D, Inc. v. Prime Focus Creative Services Canada Inc.

The Board denied Petitioner's request to file supplemental information in the form of a second affidavit from the Internet Archive because the new information could have been submitted earlier.
PTAB Digest

Google, Inc. v. Mobile Telecommunications Technologies, LLC

The Board now includes in the notice of the filing date afforded a petition, a recommendation that the parties explore alternative dispute resolution to facilitate settlement of post-grant proceedings.

About the Editors

Analysis

Search Clear Close