Reexam References Count In Section 325(d) Analysis
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] ...
Derivation Decision Offers Several Reminders for Petitioners
By Sarah Geers - The PTAB recently issued a rare decision instituting a derivation proceeding, in Global Health Solutions LLC v. Selner, DER2017-00031 (“GHC”). The GHC institution decision provides several lessons for future petitioners looking to avoid pitfalls that...
PTAB Will Not Hear AAPA-Basis Grounds
By Emily Tait - In a recent decision invalidating numerous claims of a patent related to cochlear implants for hearing loss, the PTAB found that Petitioner improperly relied on applicant admitted prior art (AAPA) as the “basis” for one asserted ground, and then...
No Do-Overs: PTAB Denies Motion for Sanctions as Untimely
By Albert Liou and Haytham Soliman - In MG Freesites Ltd v. Scorpcast, LLC, the PTAB recently denied a Petitioner’s request to file a Motion for Sanctions for alleged misconduct by the Patent Owner during depositions because the Petitioner did not raise the issue in a...
PTAB Allows Supplemental Information Request To Fly
By Kevin Yang and Joe Sauer - Once the PTAB institutes an IPR, the parties may only add supplemental information to the record by requesting authorization to file a motion to submit the information. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.123 (2022). If authorization is not requested...