直 Japanese PDF Font
  • Our Professionals
  • Our Work
  • Our Insights
  • Offices
  • Firm
  • Careers
Finnegan
  • Articles & Books
    • Ad Law Buzz Blog
    • At the PTAB Blog
    • European IP Blog
    • Federal Circuit IP Blog
    • INCONTESTABLE® Blog
    • Prosecution First Blog
  • Events & Webinars
  • IP Updates
  • Podcasts
    • AI + Finnegan
    • AI + Copyright
    • AI + Patent
    • AI + Privacy
    • AI + Trade Secrets
    • AI + Trademark
  • Unified Patent Court (UPC) Hub

Federal Circuit IP Blog

The Risks of Not Finding Out

September 21, 2020

Authored and Edited by Kyu Yun Kim; Thomas Lee Irving; Elizabeth D. Ferrill; Stacy Lewis*

The case of Trans Ova Genetics, LC v. XY, LLC, No. 2019-2312 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 8, 2020) Rule 36 affirmance of IPR2018-00250 demonstrates that the Federal Circuit, in a close case,  can use the burden of proof to decide which parties loses.  In this case, the loser was Trans Ova, who brought an IPR against XY, but never took steps to find out exactly what Green actually did. That was critical to the case of whether a prior art article was “of another.” By not finding out, Trans Ova could not carry its burden of proof and lost.

For more detailed analysis of this case, please see on Finnegan’s AIA Blog.   

Tags

inventorship, anticipation, prior art, prior use (35 USC § 102), burden of proof

Related Practices

Appeals, Issues, and Legal Strategy

Federal Circuit and Supreme Court Appeals

Patent Office Invalidation Proceedings

Prosecution and Portfolio Management

Patent Drafting and Prosecution

Related Offices

Washington, DC

Contacts

Elizabeth D. Ferrill
Partner
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4445
Email

*Stacy Lewis is a Law Clerk at Finnegan


Copyright © 2020 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.

Related Insights

Panel Discussion

2026 Advanced Patent Law Institute

December 3-4, 2026

Stanford

Conference

IAM Live: Trade Secret Strategy USA

November 1, 2026

San Jose

Charitable

2026 ALYN Hospital Wheels of Love Ride

November 8-12, 2026

Northern District

Conference

IAM Live: Navigating the UPC 2026

November 4, 2026

Paris

Conference

2026 ANA Masters of Advertising Law Conference

November 2-4, 2026

Huntington Beach

Seminar

Future IP UK

October 21, 2026

London

Conference

2026 FCBA Global Series Fall Session

October 14-16, 2026

Dublin

Conference

WTR Live: Brand Strategy Summit USA 2026

October 13-14, 2026

New York

Articles

California Brings First CCPA and Delete Act Enforcement Action Against Data Broker

September 4, 2026

Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.

  • Privacy
  • Disclaimer
  • Legal Notices
  • Fraud Alert
  • EEO Statement
  • Cookies
  • Contact Us

© 2026 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP