-
Oct 17, 2024 | 
reuters.com | David McCombs |Jonathan Bowser |Eugene Goryunov
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is seen in Alexandria, Virginia, U.S., September 1, 2020. REUTERS/Andrew Kelly - RC21QI9ZP474 Purchase Licensing Rights, opens new tabOctober 17, 2024 - Inter partes review (IPR) proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) are frequent components of patent litigation disputes. In an IPR, a third party may challenge the validity of issued claims of a patent.
-
Aug 28, 2024 | 
reuters.com | David McCombs |Eugene Goryunov |Jonathan Bowser
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is seen in Alexandria, Virginia, U.S., September 1, 2020. REUTERS/Andrew Kelly August 28, 2024 - In Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimond, No. 22-451 (June 28, 2024), the U.S. Supreme Court overruled the Court's decades-old Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U. S. 837 (1984) decision. Chevron, and its deference framework, has guided review of certain types of administrative agency rulings.
-
Jun 28, 2024 | 
reuters.com | David McCombs |Eugene Goryunov |Jonathan Bowser
June 28, 2024 - A party accused of infringing a patent in U.S. district court may challenge the validity of the asserted patent in an inter partes review (IPR) before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). Some district court defendants have sought to recover attorney fees when the plaintiff's case was litigated in an unreasonable manner.
-
Jun 7, 2024 | 
haynesboone.com | Eugene Goryunov
Partner Eugene Goryunov was featured on the cover story for the latest edition of CIO Look. Read the full conversation on patents and artificial intelligence below:
-
May 3, 2024 | 
reuters.com | David McCombs |Jonathan Bowser |Eugene Goryunov
May 02, 2024 - Inter partes review (IPR) proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) are frequent components of patent litigation disputes. The PTAB determines whether to institute a trial based on the IPR petition and the patent owner's preliminary response (POPR). The PTAB has discretion to deny institution of an IPR for reasons other than the merits of the patentability challenges.
-
Mar 29, 2024 | 
reuters.com | David McCombs |Eugene Goryunov |Jonathan Bowser
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is seen in Alexandria, Virginia, U.S., September 1, 2020. REUTERS/Andrew Kelly - RC21QI98UK35 March 29, 2024 - The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) recently published an Updated Guidance for Making a Proper Determination of Obviousness. 89 Fed. Reg. 14,449 (Feb. 27, 2024).
-
Feb 8, 2024 | 
reuters.com | David McCombs |Jonathan Bowser |Eugene Goryunov
February 8, 2024 - Swearing behind an asserted prior art reference is often a central dispute in Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) post grant review trials such as inter partes reviews (IPRs).
-
Dec 22, 2023 | 
reuters.com | David McCombs |Jonathan Bowser |Eugene Goryunov
December 22, 2023 - Inter partes reviews (IPRs) are a frequent component of patent litigation disputes. For example, a party accused of patent infringement in U.S. district court may challenge the validity of claims of the asserted patent in an IPR.
-
Dec 6, 2023 | 
ipwatchdog.com | David McCombs |Eugene Goryunov |Matthew Beck |Eileen McDermott
“Even though Dynamic Drinkware does not apply to prior art analysis for post-AIA patents, petitioners must show that the reference patent meets the ‘ministerial requirements’ of Sections 119 and 120.”In March 2023, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Board) addressed in Penumbra, Inc. v. Rapidpulse, Inc., IPR2021-01466, Paper 34 (Mar.
-
Nov 9, 2023 | 
reuters.com | David McCombs |Eugene Goryunov |Jonathan Bowser
A British banker accused of involvement in bogus Cum-Ex tax reclaims of 440 million euros from the German state, takes out papers from his briefcase at a regional court in Bonn, Germany September 24, 2019. REUTERS/Wolfgang Rattay Acquire Licensing RightsLaw FirmsHaynes and Boone, LLPNovember 9, 2023 - An inter partes review (IPR) can only challenge claims of an issued patent on anticipation or obviousness grounds, under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103, based on patents or printed publications.
