An IPR petition must be based “only on a ground that could be raised under [35 U.S.C. §§] 102 [anticipation] or 103 [obviousness] and only on the basis of prior art consisting of patents or printed publications.” 35 U.S.C. § 311(b). The “printed publication” basis for IPRs seems as fundamental an issue as one can imagine. But until late December 2019, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) offered no precedential decision explaining “[w]hat is required for a petitioner to establish that an asserted reference qualifies as [a] ‘printed publication’ at the institution stage.” The Board presented that broad question in an April 2019 order announcing it would answer that question through its Precedential Opinion Panel (POP). Hulu, LLC v. Sound View Innovations, LLC, Case IPR2018-01039, Paper 15 (PTAB Apr. 1, 2019).
Patent
- Enablement
- Fee Shifting
- Litigation
- StarrAI Night: AI Art and the Necessary Changes in the Copyright Law
- Other Barks & Bites for Friday, February 3: Trump Sues for Copyright Infringement, Google Wins Transfer from TX to CA, and Nike Takes Lululemon to Court for Patent Infringement
- Revolution Rope Inventor Tells Justices She Deserves Her Day in Article III Court
- The USPTO Claims it Wants to Ensure ‘Robust and Reliable’ Patents – But Its Questions Imply Another Assault on Patent Owners
- USPTO Issues Final Rule to Eliminate CLE Certification Program
Recent Posts
- StarrAI Night: AI Art and the Necessary Changes in the Copyright Law
- Other Barks & Bites for Friday, February 3: Trump Sues for Copyright Infringement, Google Wins Transfer from TX to CA, and Nike Takes Lululemon to Court for Patent Infringement
- Revolution Rope Inventor Tells Justices She Deserves Her Day in Article III Court
- The USPTO Claims it Wants to Ensure ‘Robust and Reliable’ Patents – But Its Questions Imply Another Assault on Patent Owners
- USPTO Issues Final Rule to Eliminate CLE Certification Program