by Matthew Johnson | Jul 10, 2020 | Trial Institution
By Sue Gerber and Matt Johnson – Recently, we reported about the Supreme Court’s decision holding that the AIA’s “no appeal” provision in 35 U.S.C. § 314(d) means that the PTAB’s decision not to institute IPR because a petition is time barred under 35 U.S.C....
by Matthew Johnson | Jul 1, 2020 | Claim Construction, Trial Institution
By Mike Lavine and Matt Johnson – On June 18, 2020, the PTAB denied an IPR petition because the Petitioner failed to sufficiently construe the means-plus-limitations of the challenged claims. Mattersight Corporation (“Mattersight”) owns the challenged patent,...
by Matthew Johnson | Jun 29, 2020 | Real Party in Interest
By Steph Brooker, Robby Breetz, Matt Johnson, and Tom Ritchie – Throughout the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (“PTAB”) history, patent owners have tried to leverage a petitioner’s alleged failure to name all real parties-in-interest (“RPIs”) as a way to achieve...
by Matthew Johnson | Jun 22, 2020 | PTAB News
By Robby Breetz and Matt Johnson – In Amneal Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Almirall, LLC, the Federal Circuit recently found 35 U.S.C. § 285 did not authorize the Court awarding attorney’s fees for conduct occurring at the PTAB. No. 2020-1106, 2020 WL 2961939, at *2...
by Matthew Johnson | Jun 16, 2020 | Trial Institution
By Marlee Hartenstein and Matt Johnson – In 3Shape A/S v. Align Tech., Inc., IPR2020-00223, Paper 12 (May 26, 2020), the PTAB declined to deny institution of an inter partes review involving a patent challenged in a pending ITC investigation. Despite the...
