New precedential decisions from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)

by John Roberts on May 10, 2016

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has designated the following five decisions as precedential:

Garmin Int’l v. Cuozzo Speed Techs LLC, IPR2012-00001, Paper 26 (Mar. 5, 2013) – This order discusses the factors considered in evaluating motions for additional discovery in IPR proceedings.

Bloomberg, Inc. v. Markets-Alert Pty, Ltd., CBM2013-00005, Paper 32 (May 29, 2013) – This order discusses the factors considered in evaluating motions for additional discovery in CBM proceedings.

Oracle Corp. v. Click-to-Call Techs, LP, IPR2013-00312, Paper 26 (October 30, 2013) (precedential only as to Section III.A.) – This decision pertains to interpretation of “served with a complaint” for purposes of triggering the one-year time bar set forth in 35 U.S.C. § 315(b).

MasterImage 3D, Inc. v. RealD Inc., IPR2015-00040, Paper 42 (July 15, 2015) – This order provides guidance on patent owner’s burden to show entitlement to substitute claims.

Lumentum Holdings, Inc. v. Capella Photonics, Inc., IPR2015-00739 (Paper 38) (March 4, 2016)– This decision interprets 35 U.S.C. § 312(a)(2).

Copies of these precedential decisions can be found on the USPTO’s website: Precedential | USPTO

Precedential | USPTOLG Electronics, Inc. V.
View on www.uspto.gov Preview by Yahoo

John Roberts

812-418-3663

www.indianapatentlawyer.com

Previous post:

Next post: