Featured Posts
- Facebook Loses Reexaminations of Pragmatus’ Patents
- How is Reexamination Treating Round Rock Research?
- Reexamination has not Saved Apple against MobileMedia Patents, So Far
- What is an “Involved Application” in IPR Practice?
- Apple Victorious over Affinity Labs of Texas’ Portable Audio Player Patent
- Think IP Strategy Offers 2011 News Almanac
- An Update on Oracle’s Infringement Case against Google
- PTO Requests Public Comment on Proposed Rules for AIA Post-Issuance Proceedings
- Microsoft-i4i, Oracle-Google & VirnetX-Apple-Cisco Updates
- Oracle Patent to Emerge from Reexamination
- VirnetX again Sues for Infringement, and again Faces Reexaminations
- How Strong are Google’s Requests for Reexamination of the Lodsys Patents?
- PTO Board Sides with NVIDIA on Two Rambus “Barth I” Patents
- Oracle ‘520 Moves toward Confirmation in Reexamination
- Google Gets Mixed Result against Oracle’s Seventh Patent
- Did Google Request Reexamination of Lodsys Patents?
- Two Updates
- Oracle v. Google Android® Update
- Rambus Wins Limited Exclusion Order at ITC against NVIDIA, despite Pending Reexaminations
- 最初が肝心：不備のない再審査請求書を作成するために
- That’s My Patent You’re Reexamining…
- “Why Wait for Oppositions?” by Scott Daniels, 47 IDEA 343 (Law Review of Franklin Pierce Law School)
- The Basics
Noteworthy Links
- "The Interplay between Reexaminations, Preliminary Injunctions and Stays of Litigation" - by Dennis Crouch at PATENTLYO.COM
Favorite Patent Blogs
- All Things Pros
- CAFC Alert
- FDA Law Blog
- IPWatchdog
- Patent Docs
- Patently-O
- PLI Patent Law Practice Center
- Think IP Strategy
- US Patent Post-Grant Opposition
Recent Requests
PTO Statistics
Omega-3 Composition Claims Challenged, Week of November 4, 2013
| November 13, 2013
Aker BioMarine AS has requested inter partes review of a patent claiming capsules that contain “an Antarctic krill oil extract” comprising specification phospholipids, the phospholipids including DHA and APA essential fatty acids derived from fish (see inter partes review Request No. (5)). the owner of the patent, Neptune Techs. & Bioressources, has sued Aker for infringement, both in Delaware District Court and at the U.S. International Trade Commission.
The steady stream of requests for post-grant review of covered business method patents continued last week with four new petitions. The invalidity grounds asserted go beyond the anticipation and obviousness allegations to which inter partes review requests are limited – two of last week’s CBM petitions included assertions that the claims were invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because they recited only abstract ideas, and two others included assertions of indefiniteness under 35 U.S.C. § 112.
Two patent owners – Honeywell and ThermoLife – requested ex parte reexamination of their own patents (see ex parte Request Nos. (3) & (5)). Although this was common in the early years of reexamination, it is somewhat unusual today.
Apotex Tests Wyeth Anti-Bacterial Composition Patent, Week of October 28, 2013
| November 4, 2013
Most notable among the filings last week was an inter partes review request submitted by Sughrue’s Kenneth Burchfiel and Travis Ribar, on behalf of Apotex, against Wyeth’s U.S Patent No. 7,879,828 (see inter partes review Request No. (8)). The ‘828 patent claims a tigecycline composition having “improved stability in both solid and solution states.” According to the ‘828 patent, tigecycline is an antibiotic in the tetracycline family that “has been shown to work where other antibiotics have failed.” Wyeth sued Sandoz in 2009 for infringement of both the ‘828 patent and Reissue Patent No. 40,188, but the case was later dismissed based on a stipulation of the parties.
Medtronic filed two inter partes review requests against a patent for an aortic valve replacement owned by Troy Norred (see inter partes review Request No. (4)). Dr. Norred sued Medtronic for infringement of the patent earlier this year. Medtronic also requested inter partes review of a stent patent owned by Valentine Rhodes (see inter partes review Request No. (1)).
Apple, Twitter & Facebook Target Computer Query Patents, Week of October 21, 2013
| October 28, 2013
Late last year, Evolutionary Intelligence began a series of actions against the who’s-who of American social media companies, notably Apple, Facebook, Foursquare Labs, Groupon, Living Social, Millennial Media, Sprint Nextel, Twitter, and Yelp, accusing them of infringing two patents that claim systems and methods for searching for information on a computer. Last week, Apple struck back, filing two requests for inter partes review of one of the patents, and four requests against the other (see inter partes review Request Nos. (4) & (6)). Such multiple requests against a single patent have become a preferred tactic for companies like Apple to overcome the PTO’s 60-page limit on requests. Facebook and Twitter filed their requests against one of Evolutionary’s patents (see inter partes review Request Nos. (12) & (13)). It is quite likely that the Patent Office will consolidate these matters.
Veeam Software was the leader, at least in terms of the number of patents challenged, filing inter partes requests against four Symantec patents (see inter partes review Request Nos. (8) to (11)). Symantec has sued Veeam for infringement of the patents.
And the enthusiasm for seeking post-grant review against business method patents claiming financial systems continued last week with four new requests (see post-grant review Request Nos. (1) to (4)).
Read More/続きを読む
Petitions for Post-Grant Review of Six “Covered Business Method Patents” Filed, Week of October 14, 2013
| October 22, 2013
The number of requests for post-grant review of covered business method patents was slow at first, but has picked up steam of late, to the point that last week there were more such requests than requests for inter partes review. Most notably, a collection of companies, lead by Apple, requested post-grant review of four patents related to “information management and synchronous communications system and method for generation of computerized menus for restaurants” (see post-grant review Request Nos. (2) to (5)). The owner of the patents, Ameranth, has sued Apple and an assortment of restaurateurs for infringement. Practitioners will be interested to note that none of the proposed grounds for rejection are based on patents or printed publications, rather the challenges are based on §§ 101 and 112.
Electronic Frontier Foundation, that describes itself as “a donor-supported membership organization working to protect fundamental rights regardless of technology,” requested inter partes review of a media content dissemination patent owned by Personal Audio (see inter partes Request No. (1)). Quite a number of media companies have been sued in the Eastern District of Texas for infringement of the patent.
Finally, the knock-down-drag-battle between NuVasive and Medtronic escalated last week with the latter filing two more requests for inter partes review (see inter partes review Request Nos. ((2) & (4)).
