Tag Archives: Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Reasonable Expectation of Success’ Analysis Must Be Tied to Claim Limitations

Photo of Mark EinsiedelBy Mark Einsiedel on Posted in Federal Circuit, Patent Trial and Appeal Board
One common rationale used to support an obviousness argument is that the patented solution would have been “obvious to try.” The Supreme Court has stated that where “there are a finite number of identified, predictable solutions” for solving a problem and that “a person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options,” … Continue Reading

“Teaching Away” – A Change To This Historically Inconsistent Doctrine

Photo of Phillip WolfeBy Phillip Wolfe on Posted in Patent
Teaching away is an important concept when considering the obviousness of a patent claim. The Federal Circuit’s recent decision in Chemours v. Daikin[1] makes it easier to find that a reference teaches away from an invention, potentially increasing the difficulty of invalidating a patent claim for being obvious. There, the Circuit reversed the Patent Trial … Continue Reading

Are Federal Reserve Banks People Too? Federal Circuit Clarifies ‘Persons’ Capable of Petitioning for Post-Grant Patent Review Under the America Invents Act

Photo of Jason OliverBy Jason Oliver on Posted in Patent
The Federal Reserve has been at the forefront of daily news in connection with its efforts to revive the national economy in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. At the same time, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Bozeman Financial LLC v. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta et al. recently ruled … Continue Reading

PTAB Denies Institution Despite Petitioner Demonstrating Reasonable Likelihood of Prevailing With Respect to at Least One Claim

Photo of David FarsiouBy David Farsiou on Posted in Patent
In SAS Institute v. Iancu, 138 S. Ct. 1348, 1351 (2018), the Supreme Court held that when the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (the Board) institutes an inter partes review, it must decide the patentability of all the claims the petitioner challenged.  The Court found that 35 U.S.C. §314(a)’s requirement that the Board find “a … Continue Reading

PTAB Grants Discovery to Underlying Test Data

Photo of David FarsiouBy David Farsiou on Posted in Patent
Discovery in inter partes review (IPR) proceedings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) is typically quite limited, and the PTAB normally is reluctant to grant motions for additional discovery. It is instructive, therefore, when the PTAB does so. In a recent order in Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Allegan, Inc., IPR2016-01127, Paper 28 (PTAB … Continue Reading

When Obvious Isn’t Obvious: Personal Web Technologies

Photo of Brendan ClarkBy Brendan Clark on Posted in Patent
On Valentine’s Day 2017, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s conclusions of obviousness in Personal Web Technologies, LLC due to insufficient analysis in the board’s decision. Judge Taranto, joined by Judge Chen and Judge Stoll, explicitly asserted the court’s role in enforcing the principles of administrative … Continue Reading

Post Grant Review: § 112 and Eligibility Issues in Chemical and Life Sciences

By Samuel McMahon on Posted in Patent
Post Grant Review (PGR) petitions are on the rise, and nearly half of all petitions to date have challenged patents in Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry, or Chemical and Materials Engineering technology centers.[1] We have reviewed PGR petitions filed against patents in these technology categories.[2] One final written decision issued on Nov. 14, 2016,[3] and more … Continue Reading

Petitioners Beware: Improper Incorporation by Reference May Result in Truncated Petition

Photo of Laura GordonBy Laura Gordon on Posted in Patent
On February 16, 2016, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“the Board”) partially denied institution of inter partes review (“IPR”) of claims 1-26 of U.S. Patent No. 8,338,724, citing  petitioner’s improper use of incorporation by reference.[1] Shenzhen Huiding Technology Co., Ltd. v. Synaptics Incorporated, IPR2015-01741, Paper 8 at 29-31 (PTAB Aug. 7, 2015) (“Shenzhen”). As … Continue Reading

Patent Trial and Appeal Board Denies Inter Partes Review of Patent Claiming the Deuterated Form of a Known Compound

Photo of Laura GordonPhoto of Stephanie Lodise, Ph.D.By Laura Gordon and Stephanie Lodise, Ph.D. on Posted in Uncategorized
In Neptune Generics, LLC v. Auspex Pharmaceuticals, Inc., IPR2015-01313, Paper No. 25 (PTAB Dec. 9, 2015) (“Neptune”), the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“the Board”) issued an opinion denying institution of inter partes review of U.S. Patent No. 7,456,317 B2 (“the ’317 patent”). The ’317 patent claims an analog of venlafaxine (Effexor®) in which nine … Continue Reading
LexBlog