by David Cochran | Feb 4, 2019 | Federal Circuit, PTAB Trial Basics
By Kait Crowder and Dave Cochran In Polygroup Limited MCO v. Willis Electric Company, Ltd., the Federal Circuit reversed and remanded the PTAB’s findings of patentability in light of several obviousness arguments presented by the petitioner, concluding that the PTAB...
by David Cochran | Aug 31, 2018 | Federal Circuit, PTAB Trial Basics
By: David Anderson and Dave Cochran On August 27, 2018, the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded the PTAB’s finding that claims 1-3, 6-9, and 12-14 of U.S. Patent No. 5,602,831 (“the ’831 Patent”) are not unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103. See Ericsson Inc. v....
by Jennifer Chheda, Ph.D. | Aug 27, 2018 | Federal Circuit, Trial Institution
By: Jennifer J. Chheda, Ph.D and John D. Kinton The Federal Circuit recently denied Power Integrations, Inc.’s (“PI”) attempt to obtain a writ of mandamus to circumvent the bar in 35 U.S.C. § 314(d) to appeal the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (“PTAB”) decisions...
by Matthew Johnson | Aug 17, 2018 | Estoppel, Federal Circuit
In Click-To-Call Tech. v. Ingenio, Inc., 2015-1242, slip op. (Fed. Cir. Aug. 16, 2018) (en banc), the Federal Circuit found that the PTAB’s treatment of voluntary dismissal without prejudice of a district court litigation as resetting the IPR...
by David Cochran | Jul 23, 2018 | Claim Construction, Federal Circuit
By: David E. Anderson[1] and Dave Cochran On July 13, 2018, the Federal Circuit reversed the PTAB’s finding that claims 1-5 and 11 of U.S. Patent No. 8,651,118 (“the ’118 Patent”) are anticipated by U.S. Patent No. 4,148,330 (“Gnaga”) and Japanese Application No....
by Jennifer Chheda, Ph.D. | Jul 9, 2018 | Federal Circuit
By: Jen Chheda and John Kinton Following the logic set forth in SAS Institute, Inc. v. Iancu, 138 S. Ct. 1348 (2018), the Federal Circuit granted Petitioner Adidas AG’s (“Adidas”) motion to remand IPR2016-00921 and IPR2016-00922 to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board...
