PTAB Committee Meeting: NYIPLA PTAB Committee to Review Recent PTAB Precedential and Informational Decisions

Join the New York Intellectual Property Law Association (NYIPLA) PTAB Committee on March 21 to discuss recent PTAB precedential and informational decisions. In this interactive meeting, Charley Macedo, Partner at Amster Rothstein & Ebenstein LLP and PTAB Committee Co-Chair, Chris Lisiewski, Associate at Amster Rothstein & Ebenstein LLP, PTAB Committee Coordinator and Co-Chair of the Inventor of the Year Committee, Keith Barkaus, Senior Counsel at Amster Rothstein & Ebenstein LLP, Yangfan Xu, Associate at Amster Rothstein & Ebenstein LLP, Thomas Hart, Law Clerk at Amster Rothstein & Ebenstein LLP, Jenna Deneault, Counsel at Groombridge, Wu, Baughman & Stone LLP and Co-Chair of the Young Lawyers Committee, and Mike Milea, Associate at Groombridge, Wu, Baughman & Stone LLPwill lead a discussion on the recent PTAB precedential and informational decisions.  The panel will review and discuss the following recent decisons:

• Nested Bean, Inc. v. Big Beings Pty Ltd., Case IPR2020-01234, Paper 42 (Feb. 24, 2023) [AIA, 35 U.S.C. § 112, fifth paragraph – granting rehearing and modifying the Final Written Decision, addressing the treatment of multiple dependent claims];
• Xerox Corp. v. Bytemark, Inc., IPR2022-00624, Paper 9 (Aug. 24, 2022) (designated: Feb. 10, 2023) [AIA, denying institution – holding declaration is entitled to little weight when it contains an exact restatement of the petition’s arguments without any additional supporting evidence or reasoning];
• Apple Inc. v. Zipit Wireless, Inc., IPR2021-01124 et al., Paper 14 (Dec. 21, 2022) (designated: Jan. 4, 2023) [AIA – vacating adverse judgments and remanding proceedings to confirm whether Patent Owner is indeed abandoning the contest or to issue a final written decision addressing the patentability of the challenged claims] (sua sponte Director review decision); 
• Patent Quality Assurance, LLC v. VLSI Technology LLC, IPR2021-01229, Paper 102 (Dec. 22, 2022) [AIA – holding Petitioner’s conduct was an abuse of the inter partes review process, sanctioning Petitioner, and determining whether the petition, based only on the record before the Board prior to institution, presents a compelling, meritorious challenge] (sua sponte Director review decision);
• OpenSky Industries, LLC v. VLSI Technology LLC, IPR2021-01064, Paper 102 (Oct. 4, 2022) [AIA – holding Petitioner’s conduct was an abuse of the inter partes review process, sanctioning Petitioner, and remanding for a determination of whether the petition, based only on the record before the Board prior to institution, presents a compelling, meritorious challenge] (sua sponte Director review decision);
• NXP USA, Inc. v. Impinj, Inc., IPR2021-01556, Paper 13 (Sept. 7, 2022) [AIA § 314(a), affirming decision denying rehearing – the only appropriate time for a petitioner to offer a stipulation related to Fintiv factor 4 is prior to the Board’s decision on institution] (sua sponte Director review decision);
• Code200, UAB v. Bright Data, Ltd., IPR2022-00861 & IPR2022-00862, Paper 18 (Aug. 23, 2022) [AIA § 314(a), vacating decision denying institution – analysis of General Plastic factors relating to a second-filed petition when the first-filed petition was not evaluated on the merits] (sua sponte Director review decision); and
• Boehringer Ingelheim Animal Health USA Inc. v. Kansas State University Research Foundation, PGR2022-00021, Paper 11 (Feb. 24, 2023) [decision vacating the Decision Denying Institution and remanding for further proceedings].

There will be a Q&A session afterward.  This event is free to all NYIPLA members and PTAB Committee members. 

1.0 NY/NJ CLE credit will be available for attendees.

Please remember to re-register for the NYIPLA and PTAB Committee if you have not yet done so in the new year. 

Materials | CLE Evaluation Form