Category Archives: America Invents Act

Silver Peak Systems, Inc. v. Joseph Matal (USPTO)

Docket No. 2-15-2072 (IPR2014-00245) PROST, BRYSON, WALLACH October 24, 2017 Non-precedential Brief summary: PTAB denial of SP’s Motion to Amend because SP did not show the proposed new claims “recite patent-eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101″ vacated and … Continue reading

Posted in America Invents Act, Inter Parties Review (IPR), IPR, Procedural Issues | Leave a comment

Helsinn Healthcare S.A. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. et al.

Docket No. 2016-1284, -1787 DYK, MAYER, O’MALLEY May 1, 2017 Brief Summary: FC panel reversed DC and found the asserted claims invalid under the § 102(b) on-sale bar. The FC panel concluded that the AIA did not change the meaning … Continue reading

Posted in America Invents Act, Anticipation (35 USC 102), Generics / ANDA, On-Sale Bar | Leave a comment

Synopsys, Inc. v. Mentor Graphics Corp. v. USPTO (Intervenor)

Docket No. 2014-1516. -1530 (IPR2012-00042) CHEN, MAYER, STOLL February 10, 2016 Brief Summary: Board decision after IPR affirmed and FC finds “the Board need only issue a final written decision with respect to claims on which [IPR] has been initiated”. … Continue reading

Posted in America Invents Act, Anticipation (35 USC 102), Appeal, Inter Parties Review (IPR), IPR | Leave a comment

  The USPTO released statistics on AIA petitions (11/30/16) which are available here: https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/aia_statistics_november2016.pdf The PTO data includes Covered Business Method (CBM) and Post-Grant Reviews (PGRs) but the Inter Partes Review (IPR) is by far the most-used pathway. Some of … Continue reading

Posted in America Invents Act, Inter Parties Review (IPR), IPR | Leave a comment

Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC v. Lee (USPTO)

No. 14-446 U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS (Justice Breyer)) June 20, 2016 Brief Summary: PTO decision whether or not to institute IPR is non-appealable under §314(d) and PTO’s use of broadest reasonable claim construction standard in IPR is proper. Summary: This … Continue reading

Posted in America Invents Act, Claim Construction, Inter Parties Review (IPR), IPR | Leave a comment

SAS Institute, Inc. v. ComplementSoft, Inc.

Docket No. 2015-1346, -1347 NEWMAN (C/D), CHEN, STOLL June 10, 2016 Brief Summary: Board claim constructions affirmed except as to claim 4 since it changed its construction in the final written decision without letting the parties respond. Summary: Following IPR … Continue reading

Posted in America Invents Act, Claim Construction, Inter Parties Review (IPR), IPR | Leave a comment

PPC Broadband, Inc. v. Corning Optical Communications RF, LLC

Docket No. 2015-1361, -1366, -1368, -1369 (IPR2013-00340, -00345, -00346, -00347) MOORE, O’MALLEY, WALLACH February 22, 2016 Brief Summary: Certain Board claim constructions found not to be unreasonable under Cuozzo (broadest reasonable interpretation) even though it is “not necessarily the correct … Continue reading

Posted in America Invents Act, Claim Construction, Inter Parties Review (IPR), IPR, Obviousness | Leave a comment