by David Maiorana | May 1, 2023 | 325(d) issues, PTAB News
By David Linden, Dave Maiorana, and Marc Blackman – Director Vidal recently vacated a decision denying institution of an inter partes review (“IPR”) to allow Google, the Petitioner, to brief whether discretionary denial was warranted under Section 325(d) in view...
by Matthew Johnson | Apr 5, 2023 | 325(d) issues, PGR, Trial Institution
By Levent Herguner and Matt Johnson – USPTO Director Kathi Vidal recently vacated a PTAB decision denying institution of a post-grant review and remanded the case for further proceedings. The petitioner challenged claims 1–27 of the ’274 patent under 35 U.S.C....
by Matthew Johnson | Aug 4, 2022 | 325(d) issues, PTAB News
By Ibrahim Ijaz,* Evan Jones, and Matt Johnson – On July 6, 2022, a panel of three Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) administrative patent judges granted institution of inter partes review (“IPR”) in STMicroelectronics, Inc. v. Trustees of Purdue...
by Matthew Johnson | May 2, 2022 | 325(d) issues, Prior Art Issues, PTAB News
By Haytham Soliman and Matt Johnson – The Board denied post grant review in Palo Alto Networks, Inc. v. Centripetal Networks, Inc. under 35 U.S.C. § 325(d) after applying the Advanced Bionics[1] framework as informed by the factors outlined in Becton.[2] ...
by David Maiorana | Dec 23, 2020 | 325(d) issues, Trial Institution
By Dave Maiorana and Zach Sharb – On December 7, 2020, the PTAB granted Activ Financial Systems, Inc.’s (“Activ”) petition for inter partes review of claim 43 and 44 of IP Reservoir LLC’s (“IP Reservoir”) U.S. Patent No. 10,062,115 (the ’115 Patent), directed...
by Matthew Johnson | Oct 20, 2020 | 325(d) issues, PTAB News, Trial Institution
By Matt Johnson – The Supreme Court has held the PTAB’s “decision to deny a petition is a matter committed to the Patent Office’s discretion,” and that there is “no mandate to institute review.” Cuozzo Speed Techs., LLC v. Lee, 136 S. Ct. 2131, 2140 (2016). ...
