The Patent Trial and Appeal Board Flexes Its Muscles

, Corporate Counsel

   | 2 Comments

A major shift is taking place in the world of patents, and nowhere is this more evident than at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's Patent Trial and Appeal Board, the body that hears patent challenges.

This article has been archived, and is no longer available on this website.

View this content exclusively through LexisNexis® Here

Not a LexisNexis® Subscriber?

Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via lexis.com® and Nexis®. This includes content from The National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at customercare@alm.com

What's being said

  • alm

    While the article is correct in stating that the PTAB is "five for five," only one Final Written Decision for Inter Partes Review has issued: GARMIN INTERNATIONAL, INC. and GARMIN USA, INC. v. CUOZZO SPEED TECHNOLOGIES LLC, and four Final Written Decisions for Covered Business Methods have issued: Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. v. Progressive Casualty Insurance Co. CBM2012-00002, 00004; CRS ADVANCED TECHNOLOGIES, INC. v. FRONTLINE TECHNOLOGIES, INC. CBM2012-00005; and SAP AMERICA, INC. v. VERSATA DEVELOPMENT GROUP, INC. CBM2012-00001.

  • alm

    While the article is correct in stating that the PTAB is "five for five," only one Final Written Decision for Inter Partes Review has issued: GARMIN INTERNATIONAL, INC. and GARMIN USA, INC. v. CUOZZO SPEED TECHNOLOGIES LLC, and four Final Written Decisions for Covered Business Methods have issued: Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. v. Progressive Casualty Insurance Co. CBM2012-00002, 00004; CRS ADVANCED TECHNOLOGIES, INC. v. FRONTLINE TECHNOLOGIES, INC. CBM2012-00005; and SAP AMERICA, INC. v. VERSATA DEVELOPMENT GROUP, INC. CBM2012-00001.

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article# 1202640957315

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.