In its Decision, the Board denied Petitioner’s request for rehearing on the Board’s Decision to Institute. Specifically, with respect to the Board’s Decision regarding Institution, Petitioner contended that the Board failed to appreciate that the ’137 patent fails to provide a written description for the term “within and between” as it appears in claims 1-67. The Board denied the request during a conference call, stating that the term “within and between” appears verbatim in the Summary of Invention portion of the specification. Petitioner argued that the verbatim description in the specification fails to convey possession of the full scope of the claimed invention. However, the Board disagreed, finding that the language of the specification describes data transfer within a subsystem. Continue reading
Category Archives: Decision on Institution
Denying Request for Rehearing on Decision on Institution IPR2014-00199
Takeaway: A party may be granted authorization to file an opposition to a request for rehearing of a decision on institution.
In its Decision, the Board denied the Request for Rehearing of the Decision instituting trial only as to claim 18. Petitioner requested rehearing of the Decision not to review claims 1-17 and 19 of the ’970 Patent. Petitioner contended that the Board, in deciding not to review claims 1-17 and 19, misapprehended or overlooked that the primary reference relied upon in the Petition taught certain elements of the claims that the Board did not believe were taught by the prior art. Petitioner also contended that the Board misapprehended or overlooked that method claims 14, 16, and 19 did not recite any particular structure for fulfilling one of the claimed features. Patent Owner filed, following authorization from the Board, an Opposition to Petitioner’s Request for Rehearing. Continue reading
Decision Denying Institution IPR2014-00319
In its Decision, the Board denied institution of the Inter Partes Review as time-barred under 35 U.S.C. § 315(b) because it was not filed within the statutory period of 35 U.S.C. § 315(b). The date of service of two different complaints was an issue of primary focus by the Board. Continue reading
Denying Institution of Inter Partes Review IPR2014-00234
In its Decision, the Board denied institution of inter partes review as to all of the challenged claims (i.e., claims 1-7 and 29-34) of the ‘340 patent because Petitioner had failed to show that there is a reasonable likelihood that it would prevail with respect to at least one of the challenged claims under 35 U.S.C. § 314(a). The ‘340 patent relates to a speaker configuration having a narrow sound output region. The independent challenged claims were claims 1, 7, and 29. Continue reading
Decision Granting Institution in Part IPR2014-00207
In its Decision, the Board instituted inter partes review with respect to claims 1-12 and 36-49 of the ‘854 patent, finding that there was a reasonable likelihood that Petitioner would prevail with respect to some of its asserted grounds of unpatentability. Continue reading
Denying Institution of Inter Partes Review IPR2014-00211
In its Decision, the Board denied institution of the inter partes review, because the information presented in the Petition did not demonstrate that there is a reasonable likelihood that Petitioner will prevail with respect to at least one of the challenged claims. The ’114 Patent relates to an actuating mechanism for a slide-out room in a mobile living quarter, such as a motor home or travel trailer. Continue reading
Decision on Request for Rehearing of Institution IPR2014-00106
In its Decision, the Board denied Petitioners’ Request for Rehearing of the Board’s Decision denying institution of inter partes review of claims 1-10 of the ‘124 patent. Although the original Petition had challenged claims 1-10, the Request for Rehearing was limited to the issue of whether independent claim 6 and its dependent claim 10 were unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over Goda in view of Toshiba. Continue reading
Denying Institution of Inter Partes Review IPR2014-00224
In its Decision, the Board denied institution of inter partes review, because Petitioner failed to show that there is a reasonable likelihood that it would prevail with respect to at least one of the challenged claims. The ’401 Patent relates to a process for treating food products, such as seafood and meats, through application of a tasteless, super-purified smoke. Continue reading
Decision Denying Institution of Inter Partes Review IPR2014-00203
Takeaway: A claim construction adopted by the Board may turn out to be a dispositive issue.
In its Decision, the Board denied institution as to all claims of the challenged ‘993 patent. The Board was not persuaded that the information that Petitioner had presented in its Corrected Petition established a reasonable likelihood that Petitioner would prevail in proving the unpatentability of any of the challenged claims. Continue reading
Decision Denying Petitioner’s Request for Rehearing IPR2013-00510
In its Decision, the Board denied Petitioner’s Request for Rehearing of the Board’s Decision denying inter partes review of claim 19 of the ‘155 patent. Although the Petition had challenged each of claims 1-23, the Request for Rehearing only dealt with claim 19. Continue reading