Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

The Intellectual Property StrategistColumns & DepartmentsIntellectual PropertyLitigationPatent Litigation

IP News

By Howard Shire and Adam Fischer
October 01, 2018

 

Federal Circuit: IPR Petitioner Always Retains Burden of Establishing Timeliness

On September 7, the Federal Circuit made clear that an IPR petitioner always retains the burden of establishing the timeliness of its petition, and that the burden never formally shifts to the patent holder; not even to identify a real party in interest. More specifically, in Worlds Inc. v. Bungie, Inc., Nos. 2017-1481, 2017-1546 & 2017-1583 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 7, 2018), slip op. Chief Judge Prost reiterated that an IPR petitioner “bears the ultimate burden of persuasion to show that its petitions are not time-barred” because of a complaint previously served on a real party in interest. Slip. Op. at 8-9 (“the timely filing of a petition … is a condition precedent to the Director's authority to act”). The court then outlined the procedure for analyzing that issue, rejecting any formal “presumption” in favor of the petitioner, and instead mandating that the PTO Board make all “factual determinations necessary to evaluate” the issue once a sufficient question is raised by the patent holder. Id. at 15.

Worlds grew out of a dispute related to computer-generated avatars. In 2012, Worlds filed suit against Activision Publishing, Inc. (Activision) in the District of Massachusetts, alleging that Activision infringed Worlds's avatar-related patents in certain of its video games, including Call of Duty. Id. at 2. In 2014, Worlds notified Activision that it intended to add another video game series — Destiny — as an additional accused product in the litigation. See, id. at 2-3. The Destiny games were distributed by Activision, but developed by Bungie, Inc. (Bungie), which was not a party to the district court suit.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Why So Many Great Lawyers Stink at Business Development and What Law Firms Are Doing About It Image

Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?

Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the Rough Image

There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.

The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later Image

The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.

A Lawyer's System for Active Reading Image

Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.

Protecting Innovation in the Cyber World from Patent Trolls Image

With trillions of dollars to keep watch over, the last thing we need is the distraction of costly litigation brought on by patent assertion entities (PAEs or "patent trolls"), companies that don't make any products but instead seek royalties by asserting their patents against those who do make products.