直 Japanese PDF Font
  • Our Professionals
  • Our Work
  • Our Insights
  • Offices
  • Firm
  • Careers
Finnegan
    • AI + Finnegan
    • Appeals, Issues, and Legal Strategy
    • Diligence, Licensing, and Opinions
    • Global IP Enforcement, Litigation, and Trials
    • Patent Office Invalidation Proceedings
    • Prosecution and Portfolio Management
    • Trademark and Brand Management
    • AI, Electronics, and Information Technology
    • Chemicals, Industrials, and Materials
    • Communications
    • Consumer Goods and Services
    • Energy
    • Hospitality, Gaming, and Leisure
    • Life Sciences
    • Transportation and Logistics
  • Experience

Experience

USPTO cancels all claims for Finnegan client CRS in second CBM proceeding (in favor of)

CRS Advanced Technologies

Frontline Placement Technologies, Inc.

Finnegan client CRS Advanced Technologies achieved a complete win in the second decision related to covered business method (CBM) patents issued by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). The Board cancelled every claim that had been pending in a related district court infringement litigation. In the CBM, Finnegan challenged the patent as not meeting the requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 101 and presented arguments in favor of claim cancellation, in what was the second such CBM hearing before the PTAB. The decision capped a decade of litigation for CRS. Frontline Technologies, Inc. initially sued CRS for patent infringement on one patent, which ultimately settled with CRS taking a patent license that Finnegan had negotiated with Frontline. Frontline later terminated the license and sued CRS a second time. The district court subsequently stayed the case pending a reexamination proceeding instituted by the USPTO on a petition filed by Finnegan on CRS's behalf, from which the patent emerged, heavily amended, two years later. Meanwhile, another Frontline patent issued and was asserted against CRS but, after a third party requested reexamination of that patent, Frontline granted CRS a covenant against suit and dropped that second patent from the litigation. The case continued for three more years on the reexamined patent, allowing Finnegan to file a CBM petition on the first day that procedure became available. The PTAB granted the petition, and a month later the district court again stayed the case, which was then in the final stages of pre-trial submissions. The Board agreed with CRS that the claims were unpatentable, and the related district court proceeding has since been dismissed with prejudice with the consent of the parties.

Frontline Placement Technologies, Inc. v. CRS Advanced Technologies, 2:07-cv-02457, E.D. Pa., Judge Robreno

CRS Advanced Technologies v. Frontline Placement Technologies, Inc., Ex Parte Reexamination No. 90/011,656, USPTO, Judge Sager

CRS Advanced Technologies v. Frontline Placement Technologies, Inc., CBM2012-00005, PTAB, Judges Bisk, Giannetti, Medley

Related Professionals

Aaron J. Capron
Partner
Palo Alto, CA
+1 650 849 6680
Email

Related Practices

Global IP Enforcement, Litigation, and Trials

Pretrial Strategies

Patent Office Invalidation Proceedings

PTAB Invalidation Proceedings: IPR and PGR

Ex Parte Reexamination (EPR)

Related Industries

AI, Electronics, and Information Technology

Electrical and Computer Technology

Communications

Financial Services and Business Systems

Related Experiences

District court grants summary judgment in favor of AstraZeneca finding invalid all asserted claims against anti-cholesterol drug Crestor®

AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP

Summary judgment of patent invalidity granted in favor of Finnegan client SinterFire Corporation

SinterFire Corp.

Finnegan client FedEx defeats Ronald Katz’s 11 year licensing litigation

FedEx Corp.

PTAB rules in favor of Finnegan client Neste Oil Oyj in IPR proceeding

Neste Oyj

Federal Circuit rules in favor of Finnegan clients Hyundai and Kia in a tire pressure monitoring system patent case

Hyundai Motor Co.; Kia Motors Corp.

Examiner's rejection reversed in favor of Finnegan client Yazaki Corporation

Yazaki Corp.

Inter partes reexamination ruling reversed in favor of Finnegan client Asetek

Asetek

Examiner's rejection reversed in favor of Finnegan client BrainScope

BrainScope

Finnegan client successfully uses CBM to invalidate a competitor’s patents

Fidelity National Information Services, Inc.; Metavante Corporation

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