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).
Recent Posts
- Amici Urge SCOTUS to Scrap Fourth Circuit Approach to Disgorgement of Non-Party Affiliates’ Profits
- Patently Strategic Podcast: Continuation Practice
- GoPro Bid to Invalidate POV Camera Claims as Abstract Shut Down by CAFC
- Wi-Fi 7: Patent Opportunities and the Impact on Intellectual Property in the Technology Sector
- Other Barks & Bites for Friday, September 6: House Version of PERA Introduced; Judicial Council Confirms Extension of Newman Suspension; OpenAI Asks Court to Dismiss Claims and Focus on Fair Use in Copyright Battle