World IP Review interviewed Finnegan partner Amanda Murphy regarding Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) cases that have “made a splash” over the past year. Murphy cited the Shaw Industries Group v. Automated Creel Systems decision, where the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit overruled the 2016 decision and provided clarification on estoppel. She noted that the Federal Circuit’s decision was a gamechanger for the petitioners—and potentially for the PTAB’s workload.
She explained, “Specifically, Shaw said IPR estoppel only applies to arguments raised during an IPR proceeding, and since an IPR does not begin until it is instituted, arguments that were not raised in a petition are not subject to estoppel.
“While acknowledging that [the 2018 SAS Institute v. Iancu decision] did not explicitly overrule Shaw or address the scope of the IPR estoppel, the Federal Circuit noted in the Caltech case that Shaw rested on the assumption that the board need not institute on all grounds, which the Supreme Court rejected in SAS,” she said.
Media Mention
Finnegan Shortlisted for the 2024 Asian Legal Business Japan Law Awards
April 26, 2024
Commentary
April 11, 2024
Media Mention
Women in Business Law Americas Awards 2024: Three Finnegan Attorneys Shortlisted
April 7, 2024
Press Release
Finnegan and BMW Group Successfully Demolish Non-Practicing Entity NorthStar’s Efforts
April 3, 2024
Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.
We use cookies on this website to provide you with the best user experience. By accepting cookies, you agree to our use of cookies. Please note that if you opt not to accept or if you disable cookies, the “Your Finnegan” feature on this website will be disabled as well. For more information on how we use cookies, please see our Privacy Policy.
Finnegan is thrilled to announce the launch of our new blog, Ad Law Buzz, devoted solely to breaking news, developments, trends, and analysis in advertising law.