USPTO PTAB Designates More IPR/CBM Decisions as Precedential

Today the USPTO announced that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) designated five more post-grant proceeding decisions as precedential. This brings the total number to eight. 

The five new decisions are as follows (with descriptions provided by the USPTO):

- 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) [requirements of petition]. 

Copies of these and the other precedential PTAB decisions can be found on the USPTO's website

All I would like to say is, “More, please!” 

Image courtesy pixabay.com.

Comments

Comments

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.