Year: 2011
-
Can Post Grant Review Enhance Patent Quality?
We have all heard about the new post grant review (PGR) aspect of the patent reform legislation. It is supposed to provide a mechanism for review of the patent initiated in the first year of the patent’s issue. Please indulge me for a bit as I explore what this may mean for the patent system as a…
-
Petition Granted for Rehearing en banc of Akamai Technologies v. Limelight Networks
On April 20, 2011, the Federal Circuit granted the petition by Akamai Technologies for rehearing en banc its appeal in Akamai Technologies, Inc. v. Limelight Networks, Inc. The order vacated the earlier opinion of December 20, 2010. The order includes a request to file new briefs addressing this question: If separate entities each perform separate…
-
Federal Circuit Decision in In re Tanaka
You might recall that we discussed the BPAI decision in In re Yasuhito Tanaka in an earlier post. On April 15, the Federal Circuit reversed the BPAI decision and remanded the matter for further proceedings in accordance with the opinion. The Federal Circuit held that a patent owner that retains original patent claims and adds new narrower claims in…
-
More on Fractus Inter Partes Reexams
Scott Daniels has created a great table summarizing the current status of the Fractus reexams. That table is posted on his blog today with a status of each individual reexamination.
-
Petitions Practice for SNQ Findings in Inter Partes Reexaminations
A prior post emphasized the importance of a well crafted petition in cases where the examiner determines that there is no SNQ in an inter partes reexamination request. Recall that the BPAI determined it had no jurisdiction to review of a determination that there was no SNQ (for certain claims) in inter partes reexamination control no. 95/001,089 (Belkin International v Optimumpath…
-
Use Petitions to Reverse Determination of No SNQ in Inter Partes Reexaminations
You see a competitor’s patent and believe it is invalid. You perform a prior art search and find prior art that you think would render at least some of the patent claims unpatentable. So after thinking about it some more, you decide to file a reexamination request in the Patent Office. In that request you illustrate that the prior art…
-
Patent Owner Reexamination Requests with Parallel Litigation
You have worked hard and obtained a patent for your company. You do your homework and believe that your competitor is infringing your patent. You ultimately engage the help of a litigation team and sue the competitor for patent infringement. But your competitor is now a defendant and responds with allegations of invalidity based on publication…
-
More on Fractus Reexaminations
My earlier post had an incomplete list of the Fractus reexaminations. A better compilation is found in a document titled: Supplemental Notification of Concurrent Proceedings Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §1.985 which is found in Reexam Control No. 95/001,414 (see item dated January 14, 2011 on Public PAIR at www.uspto.gov ). The list of reexaminations is substantial and…
-
Factors in Deciding Motions to Stay Litigation Pending Reexamination
If a patent is in reexamination at the outset of a patent infringement action, there is a possibility of obtaining a stay from the district court. But motions to stay are not always successful, and they are decided after consideration of several factors. One case that demonstrates some of the factors in deciding whether to…
-
Fractus, S.A. Patent Reexaminations Ordered
In large patent litigations it has become more likely to see defendants request reexamination of the patents asserted. Some of the advantages of doing so were outlined in prior posts. Fractus, S.A., is a company headquartered in Spain that sells and licenses technology relating to fractal antennas. Fractus asserted nine patents against a number of defendants last year. Defendants Kyocera,…