On July 24, 2023, the United States Patent and Trademark Office changed its procedures for the PTO Director’s review of certain decisions by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.  The decisions in question are those decisions of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to deny or grant petitions to institute proceedings under the America Invents Act.  Those proceedings include inter partes review and post grant review.  This change follows two years of an interim process and public comment period.Continue Reading PTO Allows Another Bite at the Apple

In Buergofol GmbH v. Omega Liner Company, Inc., 4-22-cv-04112 (DSD Jul. 13, 2023) (Karen E. Schreier), the court granted the defendant’s motion to compel and awarded monetary sanctions after the plaintiff failed to respond at all to discovery requests that the plaintiff had objected to as overbroad because the court ruled the plaintiff “still had an obligation to respond to the extent it did not object.”Continue Reading Court Orders Monetary Sanctions after Plaintiff Fails to Provide any Response to Allegedly Overbroad Discovery Requests

A court denied Netflix’s request for GoTV Streaming to supply documents relating to the source of its patent litigation funding. Scott Hervey and Eric Caligiuri discuss this dispute on this episode of The Briefing by the IP Law Blog.Continue Reading The Briefing by The IP Law Blog: Court Rules Litigation Funding Not Relevant in Netflix v. GoTV

In response to Google L.L.C.’s (“Google”) and other’s petitions for inter partes review (“I.P.R.”) of two patents owned by Parus Holdings, Inc. (“Parus”), the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) found a number of claims obvious over prior art. The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB’s decision, shedding additional light on the requirements and burdens of patent owners when responding to I.P.R. petitions.Continue Reading Don’t Ask Judges to Be Archaeologists