Category Archives: Post-grant review

Return Mail, Inc. v. United States Postal Service

Docket No. 2016-1502 (CBM2014-00116) PROST, NEWMAN (D), WALLACH August 28, 2017 Brief summary: Board decision that USPS had standing to pursue CBM challenge and finding certain claims patent ineligible under § 101 affirmed. Summary: Return Mail (RM) appealed PTAB decision … Continue reading

Posted in Article III disputes, Covered Business Method Reviews, Patentability, Post-grant review | Leave a comment

Altaire Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Paragon Bioteck, Inc.

PGR2015-00011 (US 8,859,623 B1) Post-Grant Review Decision November 14, 2016 Brief Summary: Preamble found not to limit the claim; petition for PGR found not to show unpatentability of the claims by a preponderance of the evidence. Summary: The grounds for … Continue reading

Posted in Inter Parties Review (IPR), IPR, Obviousness, Post-grant review, Preamble | Leave a comment

Coalition for Affordable Drugs VII LLC (Petitioner; “CAD”) v. Pozen Inc. (Patent Owner)

IPR2015-01344 (U.S. Pat. No. 8,858,996 B2) December 17, 2015 Brief Summary: CAD’s Petition alleging obviousness or anticipation denied because, e.g., the cited art “would [not] have given one of ordinary skill in the art a reason to formulate a tablet … Continue reading

Posted in Anticipation (35 USC 102), Claim Construction, Inter Parties Review (IPR), Obviousness, Post-grant review, Written description | Leave a comment

Merck & CIE v. Gnosis S.P.A. et al.

Docket Nos. 2014-1779 NEWMAN(D), PLAGER, HUGHES December 17, 2015 Brief Summary: PTAB decision of obviousness affirmed (motivation derived from prior art, no nexus shown). Judge Newman’s dissent argues post-grant review improperly allows “the petitioner [to] provide invalidity by no more … Continue reading

Posted in America Invents Act, Inter Parties Review (IPR), Obviousness, Post-grant review | Leave a comment

Benefit Funding Systems LLC et al. v. Regions Financial Corp. et al.

Docket No. 2014-1122, -1124, -1125 PROST, LOURIE, HUGHES September 25, 2014 Brief Summary: DC grant of stay in litigation pending PTO review of claims under the Transitional Program for Covered Business Method Patents to determine patentability under 35 U.S.C. § … Continue reading

Posted in Appeal, Business methods, Post-grant review | Leave a comment