Experience
Roland Corp.
inMusic Brands, Inc.
Patent owner inMusic asserted three patents related to its electronic drum kit technology against Roland AG, in a case filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island. In response, Roland filed at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) inter partes review (IPR) petitions on all three patents, asserting more than 100 invalidity grounds. inMusic chose Finnegan to defend its patents and file patent owner responses to each IPR petition. Finnegan argued that the prior art did not disclose inMusic’s inventions. The PTAB agreed and denied institution in all three IPRs, resulting in a complete win for inMusic.
Roland Corp. v. inMusic Brands, Inc., IPR2018-00332, -00335, -00396 , PTAB, Judges Chagnon, Jivani, Stephens, Margolies
Finnegan secures a non-institution decision at the PTAB for client iFLY Holdings LLC
iFLY Holdings LLC
Finnegan secures a non-institution decision at the PTAB for Health Diagnostic Laboratory
Health Diagnostic Laboratory, Inc,
Finnegan client AbbVie secures non-institution decisions for Humira® patents
AbbVie Biotechnology, Ltd
AbbVie secures four non-institution decisions for Humira® patent
AbbVie Biotechnology, Ltd.
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.