PTAB Institutes IPR Despite Concurrent Ex Parte Reexamination
By Levent Herguner and Matt Johnson - In Thermaltake Technology Co., Ltd. et al v. Chien-Hao Chen et al, IPR2024-01230, Paper 12 (PTAB Feb. 19, 2025), the PTAB granted the institution of inter partes review (“IPR”) while an ex parte reexamination (“EPR”) on the same...
PTAB Allows Three Concurrent IPR Petitions for Unusual Patent Claims
By Shane Padilla and Matt Johnson - Recently, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“the Board”) was persuaded to consider the merits of three out of seven concurrent petitions for an inter partes review of a single patent due to the patent’s complicated claiming...
PTAB Finds Petition Time Barred
By Dalton Earich and Matt Johnson - In 2985 LLC d/b/a Mountain Voyage Company, LLC v. The Ridge Wallet LLC, a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) panel denied inter partes review (“IPR”) institution where the petition was time barred under 35 U.S.C. § 315(b) (“§...
Expert Testimony Supporting POPR Can Be An Effective Strategy
By Sue Gerber - It is relatively uncommon for parties to submit expert declarations in the preliminary-response phase of an IPR proceeding, but recently the Patent Owner in Imperative Care, Inc. v. Inari Medical, Inc. effectively used that strategy to defeat...
Federal Circuit Reverses District Court’s Application Of Collateral Estoppel
By Zac Hardy and Matt Johnson - Kroy IP Holdings, LLC sued Groupon, Inc., alleging infringement of 13 claims of U.S. Patent No. 6,061,660 (“’660 patent’), which relates to incentive programs over computer networks. Those claims were invalidated via successful IPR...