On April 5, 2019, PTAB designated the Huawei decision as precedential and the Chevron Oronite and Deeper decisions as informative. Huawei Device Co., Ltd. v. Optis Cellular Technology, LLC, IPR2018-00816 (PTAB Jan. 8, 2019) (Paper 19); Chevron Oronite Co. LLC v. Infineum USA L.P., IPR2018-00923 (PTAB Nov. 7, 2018) (Paper 9); Deeper, UAB v. Vexilar, Inc., IPR2018-01310 (PTAB Jan. 24, 2019) (Paper 7).
In Huawei, the PTAB provided guidance as to the procedure for submitting new evidence with a rehearing request and explained that a party must show good cause for submitting new evidence.
In Chevron Oronite, the PTAB denied institution under Section 314(a) where the petitioner demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of prevailing only as to two claims out of 20 claims challenged.
In Deeper, the PTAB denied institution under Section 314(a) where the petitioner demonstrated a likelihood of prevailing only as to two claims out of 23 claims challenged and only as to one of four asserted grounds of patentability.
Full text of the decisions are available here.
In Huawei, the PTAB provided guidance as to the procedure for submitting new evidence with a rehearing request and explained that a party must show good cause for submitting new evidence.
In Chevron Oronite, the PTAB denied institution under Section 314(a) where the petitioner demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of prevailing only as to two claims out of 20 claims challenged.
In Deeper, the PTAB denied institution under Section 314(a) where the petitioner demonstrated a likelihood of prevailing only as to two claims out of 23 claims challenged and only as to one of four asserted grounds of patentability.
Full text of the decisions are available here.
RSS Feed
