April 25, 2018
Fitch Even partner David A. Gosse was quoted in today’s issue of Law360 in an article covering yesterday’s Supreme Court decisions in Oil States Energy Services LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group LLC and SAS Institute Inc. v. Iancu.
In the article, “Lawyers Weigh in on PTAB Cases at the High Court,” Dave comments specifically on the SAS Institute case:
Avoiding institution after SAS Institute now requires patent owners to show that petitioners failed to show a reasonable likelihood that any challenged claim is invalid. More patent owners might strategically disclaim borderline claims before preliminary response, and submit preliminary response on the petition’s weakest arguments. In pending partially instituted IPRs, the PTAB will have to decide how to resolve issues that were not originally instituted, even where the parties have already taken depositions, filed responses or replies, or conducted oral hearings. The Federal Circuit will have to address IPRs in which final decisions were issued on partially instituted petitions.
The article can be read in its entirety on the Law360 website (sub. req.).
Dave has a diverse IP law practice encompassing both the acquisition and the enforcement of patent rights, which includes representing clients in all phases of litigation from due diligence investigations through trial and post-trial motions. He also has considerable experience in practice before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board in inter partes review and covered business method proceedings.
IP Alert | Federal Circuit Clarifies Equitable Intervening Rights Extend Beyond Protecting Monetary InvestmentsFebruary 26, 2021
On February 19, in John Bean Technologies Corp. v. Morris & Associates, Inc., the Federal Circuit clarified the types of investments that may be entitled to protections under the doctrine of equitable intervening rights, holding that it can extend beyond a monetary investment. Read more
IP Alert | Knowledge Within the Art Does Not Save Means-Plus-Function Claim Term Lacking Corresponding StructureFebruary 19, 2021
On February 12, in Synchronoss Technologies, Inc. v. Dropbox, Inc., the Federal Circuit affirmed that certain of Synchronoss's claims were invalid for indefiniteness, since the claims included a means-plus-function claim term that did not have adequate structural support in the specification. Read more