Call 855-808-4530 or email GroupSales@alm.com to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The America Invents Act (AIA) created inter partes review (IPR) to allow the public to challenge issued patents based upon published prior art. IPRs allowed for greater participation for challengers, and replaced the previous inter partes reexamination procedure. IPRs are conducted before a panel of Administrative Patent Judges of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). In contrast, inter partes reexamination was conducted before a patent examiner, and permitted appeal to the PTAB.
By Peter Kidd
Iancu v. Brunetti
The Supreme Court held the bar against registration of immoral or scandalous marks “collided” with well-established free speech doctrine, namely, that laws disadvantaging speech based on the views expressed thereby violate the First Amendment.
By Charles A. Cartagena-Ortiz
The U.S. Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decision in Mission Product Holdings, Inc. v. Tempnology , ruling that a trademark licensee can retain its rights under a trademark license agreement that is rejected by the licensor as an executory contract in bankruptcy.
By Dorothy Leray and Jeff Ginsberg
Federal Circuit Affirms PTAB Decision Finding Lack of Written Description for Methods of Detection
Federal Circuit Dismisses Appeal of IPR Decision for Lack of Standing
By Karen Hoffman Lent and Kenneth Schwartz
The DOJ’s intervention, and the judge’s ultimate decision, has exposed tensions between the DOJ and FTC, and within the FTC itself, and public scrutiny is far from over as the case heads to the Ninth Circuit on appeal.