Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
On May 27, 2020 the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) proposed rule changes to govern inter partes review (IPR), post-grant review (PGR), and covered business method (CBM) review proceedings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). The most significant proposal would eliminate the presumption that a genuine issue of material fact created by testimonial evidence filed with a patent owner preliminary response would be viewed in the light most favorable to petitioner when deciding to institute a review. Adoption of this rule could encourage more patent owners to file declarations with their preliminary responses, and may ultimately result in decreasing petitioner success rates in obtaining institution of review. The other changes would simply conform the rules to current USPTO practices, and are therefore less noteworthy. Below is a summary of each proposed rule change and its potential impact on PTAB practice.
*May exclude premium content
By Stacey C. Kalamaras and Henry Kaskov
This article explores the options available to a client to value its trademarks during a financial crisis, to ensure one of the most valuable assets it owns can continue to work for the company and see it through the lean times.
By Jared Looper
Federal Treasury Enterprise Sojuzplodoimport v. Spirits International BV
What do the fall of the Soviet Union, a heist of trademark rights, and Stolichnaya vodka have in common? They are all key components of the Russian Federation’s efforts to reclaim its trademarks in Stolichnaya vodka.
By Laura O’Laughlin, Harriet Ho and Duy (Joey) Duong
As survey evidence has become increasingly common in litigation, it is important to remember that not all surveys are made the same. It’s important to be able to identify the right survey methodology for the matter at hand. Third in a series
By Jeff Ginsberg and Abhishek Bapna
Federal Circuit: ITC Did Not Err in Denying Non-Respondent’s Petition to Rescind Exclusion Order Based on Invalidity Grounds
Federal Circuit: District Court Did Not Err in Ruling that ‘Half-Liquid’ Is Indefinite
Federal Circuit: District Court Did Not Err In Allowing Jury to Determine Infringement Based on Products’ Compliance with Standard