Skip to content

menu

Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C. logo
HomeAboutContact
Rothwell Figg's

PTAB Law Blog

PTAB DecisionsAppellate DecisionsAbout the PTAB

103

Subscribe to 103

How Creative is One of Ordinary Skill – DSS Tech. Mgmt. v. Apple Inc.

By John D. Higgins on April 16, 2018
Posted in Appellate Decisions

In an attempt to challenge the patentability of an issued claim, petitioners every so often come across a prior art reference that discloses all the recited features of the claim at-hand except for one limitation.  Rather than bringing in another reference to teach that one limitation, petitioners sometimes merely refer to the knowledge and creativity…

How Many References Is Too Many for Challenging a Patent on Obviousness?

By Soumya P. Panda, Mark T. Rawls & Caitlin M. Wilmot on April 10, 2017
Posted in About the PTAB

The PTAB does not appear to have weighed in, one way or another, on the question of how many references is too many for an obviousness challenge under 35 U.S.C. § 103—at least not explicitly.  Implicitly, the PTAB has regularly instituted inter partes review of patents where four or more references have been used to…

PTAB: No Chance to Re-characterize Disclosures of Reference in IPRs

By Spencer J. Johnson on March 21, 2017
Posted in PTAB Decisions

Final Written Decisions were entered on March 7, 2017 in 6 IPRs brought by Qualcomm Inc. against ParkerVision, Inc (IPR2015-01828, -01829, -01831, -01832, -01833, and -01834). These 6 IPRs all challenged patent 6,091,940 (the ’940 patent), a patent directed to methods and systems where a signal with a lower frequency is up-converted to a higher…

Blog Editors

Photo of Joseph A. HyndsJoseph A. HyndsMember
Photo of Martin M. ZoltickMartin M. ZoltickMember
Photo of Jenny L. ColgateJenny L. ColgateMember
Photo of Michael H. JonesMichael H. JonesMember
Photo of Brett A. PostalBrett A. PostalMember

About this Blog

Authored and edited by attorneys in Rothwell Figg’s Post-Grant Trial Group, Rothwell Figg’s PTAB Law Blog provides updates, articles, and analyses regarding the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), the intersection of district court litigation and PTAB practice, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC), the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), and the America Invents Act (AIA) and patentability of inventions generally.

Read More....

Stay Connected

RSS LinkedIn Twitter Facebook
Subscribe to this blog

Topics

Archives

Blog Authors Show/Hide

  • D. Lawson Allen
  • Michael V. Battaglia
  • Eric D. Blatt
  • Jenny L. Colgate
  • Nicole M. DeAbrantes
  • Aydin H. Harston
  • Dylan Haversack
  • Spencer J. Johnson
  • Michael H. Jones
  • Alvin Lee
  • Grant B. Lukas
  • Jennifer B. Maisel
  • Daniel R. McCallum
  • Patrick Moon
  • Jennifer P. Nock
  • Brett A. Postal
  • Mark T. Rawls
  • Dan Shores
  • Andrew J. Storaska
  • Anjali Jenna (AJ) Teigen
  • Richard E. Waterman
  • Caitlin M. Wilmot
  • Martin M. Zoltick

Recent Posts

  • Mixed Result in M&K Holdings v. Samsung Electronics: Federal Circuit Finds Anticipation not Necessarily Inherent in Obviousness Theory
  • Preambles: Limitation or Not?
  • The USPTO Clarifies its Approach to Indefiniteness in AIA Post-Grant Proceedings
  • Kannuu v. Samsung: Forum Selection Clause Did Not Prohibit IPR Challenges
  • ABS Global v. Cytonome/St, LLC: Mootness and Preserving the Argument for Vacatur

Rothwell Figg Blogs

  • Biosimilars Law Bulletin
  • Privacy Zone
  • RF EMerge
Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C.
Washington, DC
607 14th St. NW
Suite 800
Washington, DC 20005
202.783.6040
info@rfem.com
Boston
One Boston Place
Suite 2600
Boston, MA 02108
617.312.3101
info@rfem.com
RSS LinkedIn Twitter Facebook
Privacy PolicyDisclaimer

About Our Firm

To learn more about our firm and other practice areas, visit www.rfem.com.

Copyright © 2021, Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C.. All Rights Reserved.
Powered By LexBlog