Search for Term

Category Archives: PTAB

I Say Yes, You Say No: PTAB Articulates Different Standards for Determining Whether a Printed Publication Was Publicly Available

Posted by

Ex parte Grillo-Lopez, Appeal No. 2018-006082 (Jan. 31, 2020)

On April 7, 2020, the PTAB designated its January decision in Ex parte Grillo-Lopez (“the Decision”) as precedential. In the Decision, the Board held that patent examination and IPR proceedings have different standards for establishing a prior art printed publication, with the petitioner in an IPR facing a higher burden of showing that a reference was publicly accessible. Having been designated as precedential, the Decision is now binding authority in all USPTO ex parte proceedings. Continue reading…

PTAB Determines That Medical Journal Article Qualifies as a Publicly Available Printed Publication

Posted by

Grunenthal GmbH v. Antecip Bioventures II LLC, PGR2018-00092 (Feb. 25, 2020)

In a recent decision invalidating certain claims of a pain treatment patent, the PTAB held that a 2012 article published in the scientific journal Rheumatology was a publicly available printed publication that qualified as prior art.

Continue reading…

A User’s Guide to Prior Art: PTAB Holds That a User Manual May Qualify As a Printed Publication

Posted by

Cisco Systems, Inc. v. Centripetal Networks, Inc., IPR2018-01437 (Jan. 23, 2020)

In a recent inter partes review decision invalidating a patent disclosing systems and methods for filtering network data transfers, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board held that a user manual was a publicly available printed publication that qualified as prior art.

Continue reading…

No Do-Overs: Federal Circuit Denies Unsuccessful IPR Petitioner’s Request for a New Hearing in Light of Arthrex

Posted by

Ciena Corp. v. Oyster Optics, LLC, Appeal No. 2019-2117 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 28, 2020)

The Federal Circuit has held that a party that petitioned for inter partes review before the Patent Trial Appeal Board and subsequently obtained an unfavorable ruling cannot now invoke Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc. to vacate and remand the Board’s decision for a new hearing before a differently constituted panel.

Continue reading…