Patexia. Pros and Cons: PTAB vs. District Courts

Pros and Cons: PTAB vs. District Courts

Thursday, February 11th at 10:30 am United States (GMT -07:00) Pacific

Speakers: Matt Phillips and Kevin Laurence, Partners at Renaissance IP Law Group

Navigation: Home >IP Matters Webinars > Pros and Cons: PTAB vs. District Courts


PTAB (Patent Trial and Appeal Board) or district court? Where should I bring my patent validity challenge? Hundreds of lawyers and their clients decide every year that the PTAB is their first choice of venue to invalidate a patent. Described as a “death squad,” the PTAB does indeed offer a number of advantages over a traditional invalidity defense in court. The claim interpretation is broader; the evidentiary standard is lower; the PTAB judges are technically trained and understand very well what is legally obvious; PTAB trials are fast and less expensive than traditional court litigation; and district courts are often happy to stay a patent case pending a PTAB trial. It is not surprising that so many opt to have their patent validity challenges decided by the PTAB rather than a lay jury in eastern Texas. Yet, behind the allure of an easy, quick, cheap victory at the PTAB are serious risks for the unwary, and the PTAB is not the best venue for all validity challenges. This webinar will discuss in detail the various pros and cons of the PTAB as an alternative (and sometimes an adjunct) to district court for patent validity challenges.

The webinar will last 60 minutes.

This webinar is the third in Patexia's Spotlight on PTAB series, running through March 2016.

Suggested Audience: IP practitioners working with law firms and operating companies, Companies considering using an AIA review to invalidate a patent asserted against them, licensing professionals interested in validity issues



 

About the Speakers

 

Matt Phillips

Matt Phillips is a founding partner at Renaissance IP Law Group. Mr. Phillips has over 20 years of experience working with patents in a variety of settings, including government service as a patent examiner and a law clerk to Judge Alan D. Lourie at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Mr. Phillips’ practice focuses on post-issuance proceedings at the PTO, and he has been lead counsel in about 30 AIA post-issuance proceedings. Mr. Phillips is a co-creator and co-instructor for the biannual three-day “post-grant” course Patent Resources Group, as well as an adjunct professor at Lewis & Clark Law School. He has co-authored over 40 articles, as well as a two-volume treatise, on post-grant topics. He has been active in numerous bar associations, including the Federal Circuit Bar Association, for which he most recently served as co-chair of its PTO Committee.

Kevin Laurence

Kevin Laurence is a partner at Renaissance IP Law Group. He represents patent owners and challengers in high stakes post-grant proceedings. Best Lawyers in America named Mr. Laurence their 2016 “Lawyer of the Year” in Patent Law for Washington, D.C. Intellectual Asset Management has identified him as one of the leading practitioners in the United States for post-grant proceedings each year since 2012. Mr. Laurence teaches a course as an adjunct professor at the George Washington University Law School on post-grant proceedings. He has also served as an instructor for Patent Resources Group since 2009 in courses on post-grant proceedings and co-authors a two-volume treatise titled Post-Grant Patent Practice provided in conjunction with the courses.