by Matthew Johnson | Sep 22, 2022 | Prior Art Issues, PTAB News
By Sean Benevento, Mike Lavine, and Matt Johnson – In LG Electronics v. Immervision, the Federal Circuit clarified the standard for evaluating whether a prior art reference includes an obvious typographical error. See 39 F.4th 1364, 1365 (Fed. Cir. 2022). Under...
by Emily Tait | Sep 15, 2022 | PTAB News
By Emily Tait – In the precedential decision Gen. Plastic Indus. Co. v. Canon Kabushiki Kaisha, IPR2016-01357, Paper 19 (PTAB Sept. 6, 2017), the PTAB articulated seven non-exclusive factors to be considered before discretionarily denying a subsequent IPR...
by David Maiorana | Sep 15, 2022 | PGR, PTAB News
By David Linden and Dave Maiorana – U.S. Patent No. 9,157,017 (“the ’017 Patent”) is assigned to Honeywell International Inc. (“Honeywell”) and is titled, “Compositions Containing Fluorine Substituted Olefins and Methods and Systems Using Same.” The detailed...
by Josh Nightingale | Sep 1, 2022 | Discovery, PTAB News
By Christian Roberts and Josh Nightingale – The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) recently denied a Petitioner’s Motion for Additional Discovery. Scientific Design Co., Inc. v. Shell Oil Co., IPR2021-01537, Paper 18 (PTAB Aug. 12, 2022). In an inter partes...
by John Evans, Ph.D. | Aug 26, 2022 | District Court, Estoppel, PTAB News
By Lisa Furby, John Evans, and Michelle Smit – After a final written decision issues, an IPR petitioner is statutorily estopped from going back to the district court and arguing that the same claims are “invalid on any ground that the petitioner raised or...
by Matthew Johnson | Aug 23, 2022 | Evidentiary Issues, PTAB News, PTAB Trial Basics
By Sue Gerber and Matt Johnson – While creativity has its place in advocacy, it can be taken too far. The Petitioner learned this lesson the hard way in Unified Patents Inc. v. American Patents LLC, IPR2019-00482, Paper 132 (P.T.A.B. Aug. 3, 2022). In this...
