February 7, 2018
Authored and Edited by Pier D. DeRoo; Kara Specht; Elizabeth D. Ferrill
Petitioner Maxlinear filed two co-pending IPR proceedings against the ’585 patent, each asserting different prior art. In one IPR proceeding, the PTAB invalidated the independent claims, which the Federal Circuit affirmed in CF Crespe LLC v. Silicon Labs. Inc., No. 2017-1072, 2017 WL 6044690 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 7, 2017). But because the IPR did not involve dependent claims 4, 6-9, and 21, those claims remained patentable and available for assertion against Petitioner Maxlinear.
In the other proceeding, the PTAB upheld the instituted claims, but based its decision on the patentability of the independent claims over the asserted prior art, and did not separately discuss or analyze the dependent claims. On appeal, the Federal Circuit concluded that collateral estoppel applied as to the independent claims based on the invalidity holding from the earlier appeal in the co-pending IPR. This estoppel, as the Federal Circuit stated, abrogated the basis of the PTAB’s decision on the dependent claims in the second IPR, because the dependent claims were upheld solely based on the patentability of the now-invalid independent claims. Thus, the court vacated and remanded for the PTAB to re-analyze dependent claims 4, 6-9, and 21.
Copyright © 2018 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP.
DISCLAIMER: Although we wish to hear from you, information exchanged in this blog cannot and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not post any information that you consider to be personal or confidential. If you wish for Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP to consider representing you, in order to establish an attorney-client relationship you must first enter a written representation agreement with Finnegan. Contact us for additional information. One of our lawyers will be happy to discuss the possibility of representation with you. Additional disclaimer information.
INCONTESTABLE® Blog
Winning the Battle but Not the War: Disclaimer Requirement Overturned, Section 2(d) Objection Upheld
March 28, 2024
Federal Circuit IP Blog
March 21, 2024
Ad Law Buzz Blog
“Banning” a Banned Ingredients Claim: NAD’s Application (and Expansion) of the FTC’s Green Guides
March 18, 2024
At the PTAB Blog
Federal Circuit PTAB Appeal Statistics for December 2023 and January 2024
March 8, 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.