Innovation, Technology, and IP News

Update: Thanks to one of our readers who discovered an error in our ITC numbers for Q3. We have already updated the article with the correct data. The third... Read More »

NETWORK-1 TECHNOLOGIES, INC. v. HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY, HEWLETT PACKARD ENTERPRISE COMPANY Before Prost, Newman, and Bryson. Appeal from the United States... Read More »

table td {font-size: 12px !important;}table td a {font-size: 12px !important;}table th{font-size: 12px !important;}Earlier this month we released our 2020 IPR... Read More »

ALACRITECH, INC. V. INTEL CORP., CAVIUM, LLC, DELL, INC. Before Stoll, Chen, and Moore. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: The... Read More »

ESIP SERIES 2, LLC V. PUZHEN LIFE USA, LLC Before Reyna, Lourie, and Hughes. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: The PTAB’s... Read More »

Running a profitable patent prosecution practice has become more challenging in recent years. The recession triggered by the current pandemic is going to make this... Read More »

GOLDEN v. U.S. Before O’Malley, Mayer, and Wallach.  Appeal from the United States Court of Federal Claims. Summary: (1) Patent infringement claims ... Read More »

CAFC Decision Moots Some POP Consideration in Hunting Titan Dispute Last November, the PTAB ordered Precedential Opinion Panel (POP) review of the final written... Read More »

Invalidity Counterclaims-In-Reply Will Not Trigger 35 U.S.C. § 315(a) Congress created IPR to provide a “quick and cost effective alternative[ ] to... Read More »

The Fed. Cir. panel decision in Samsung Elec. Amer., Inc. v. Prisua Engineering Corp., Appeal No. 2019-1169, 2019-1260 (Fed. Cir., Feb. 4, 2020) flew under my... Read More »

Earlier this year, we analyzed the 2019 patent activities in Patexia Insight 74. Among our observations, we noticed a sharp decline in the number of IPR petitions... Read More »

Written by: Eric Malmgren & Hans L. Mayer APPLE INC. v. ANDREA ELECTRONICS CORPORATION Before Dyk, Plager, and Stoll.  Appeal from the Patent Trial... Read More »

Happy New Year! This morning, we released our first ITC Intelligence Report, where we looked at more than 7,000 attorneys, 400 law firms and 1,600 companies, measured ... Read More »

Reasonably Could Have Raised & Reasonably Diligent Prior to last year’s SAS decision, district courts split over whether non-petitioned grounds were... Read More »

In Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., Appeal No. 2018-2140 (Fed. Cir., Oct. 31, 2019), a three Judge Fed. Cir. panel of Moore, Reyna and Chen took a deep dive ... Read More »

A few weeks ago, we released our 3rd Annual IPR Intelligence Report. Several companies asked us to further explain how to use the Excel file came with the report for... Read More »

Over the last few weeks, we have been covering some of the firms and law firms with the largest growth or decline in IPR activity over the last five years. We are... Read More »

During the last couple of weeks, we have been covering law firms that had the largest decline (Patexia Insight 66) or growth (Patexia Insight 67) in their IPR... Read More »

Precedential Opinions & Trial Guide? The Federal Circuit’s en banc opinion in In re Aqua Products was as massive as it was unfulfilling. This was due... Read More »

Last week we reviewed the firms with the largest decline in their IPR activity over the last five years (2014 to 2018), attempting to find a theory behind each drop... Read More »