Featured News

Patent Office Litigation - Order Your Copy Today

A key publication for patent owners, litigators, and IP professionals operating in today’s global economy, Patent Office Litigation is a two-volume set focused on the new contested proceedings under the America Invents Act. This book examines how the proceedings interact with other aspects of patent procurement and enforcement, and delivers practical analysis and advice. To order your copy of Patent Office Litigation today, click here.

Learn More

Quick Stat

508

Total Number of petitions for Covered Business Method review filed as of March 16, 2017

Learn More

6042

Total Number of petitions for Inter Partes Review filed as of March 16, 2017

Learn More

Resources

Law & Legislation

Patent Trial & Appeal Board (PTAB) Representative Orders, Decisions, and Notices

Representative Trial Hearing Orders:

Representative Decisions to Institute:

 Representative Scheduling Orders:

Other Representative Orders and Decisions:

Representative Notices:

 Representative Settlement Related Orders:

Evidentiary Decisions and Orders including Discovery:

 

Cases:

  • Crocs, Inc. v. International Trade Commission (Fed. Circ. 2010) (Download PDF)
  • International Seaway Trading Corp. v. Walgreens Corp. (Fed. Circ. 2009) (Download PDF)
  • Amado v. Microsoft Corp., 517 F.3d 1353 (Fed. Cir. 2008) (Download PDF)
  • Cooper Techs. Co. v. Dudas, No. 2008-1130, slip op. at 2-7 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 19, 2008) (Download PDF)
  • Egyptian Goddess Inc. v. Swisa Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2008) (Download PDF)
  • In re Bilski, 545 F.3d 943, 88 U.S.P.Q.2d 1385 (Fed. Cir. 2008) (Download PDF)
  • In re Swanson, 540 F.3d. 1368 (Fed. Cir. 2008) (Download PDF)
  • Sundance, Inc. v. Demonte Fabricating LTD. (Fed. Cir. Dec. 24, 2008) (Download PDF)
  • In re Seagate Technology, LLC, 497 F.3d 1360 (Fed. Cir. 2007) (Download PDF)
  • KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (KSR), US Supreme Court (2007) (Download PDF)
  • Shockley v. Arcan, Inc., 248 F.3d 1349, 1353 (Fed. Cir. 2001) (Download PDF)
  • Viskase Corp. v. Am. Nat’l Can Co., 261 F.3d 1316, 1328, 59 USPQ2d 1823, 1831 (Fed. Cir. 2001) (Download PDF)
  • Bloom Eng’g Co. v. N. Am. Mfg. Co., 129 F.3d 1247, 1250 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (Download PDF)
  • In re Lonardo, 119 F.3d 960 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (Download PDF)
  • In re Portola Packaging, Inc., 110 F.3d 786 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (Download PDF)
  • In re Recreative Technologies, 83 F.3d 1394, 1397 (Fed. Cir. 1996) (Download PDF)
  • In re GPAC, 57 F.3d 1573, 1579 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (Download PDF)
  • In re Freeman, 30 F.3d 1459, 1464 (Fed. Cir. 1994) (Download PDF)
  • Laitram Corp. v. NEC Corp., 952 F.2d 1357, 1358 (Fed. Cir. 1991) (Download PDF)
  • Tennant Co. v. Hako Minuteman, Inc., 878 F.2d 1413, 1417 (Fed. Cir. 1989) (Download PDF)
  • Ethicon v. Quigg, 849 F.2d 1422, 1428, 7 USPQ2d 1152, 1157 (Fed. Cir. 1988) (Download PDF)
  • Fortel Corp. v. Phone-Mate, Inc., 825 F.2d 1577, 1580 (Fed. Cir. 1987) (Download PDF)
  • Customer Accessories, Inc. v. Jeffrey-Allan Indus., Inc., 807 F.2d 955, 962 (Fed. Cir. 1986) (Download PDF)
  • In re Etter, 756 F.2d 852, 857, 225 USPQ 1, 4 (Fed. Cir. 1985)(en banc) (Download PDF)
  • Seattle Box Co. v. Industrial Crating and Packing Inc., 756 F.2d 1574,1579 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (Download PDF)
  • Envtl. Designs, Ltd. v. Union Oil Co., 713 F.2d 693, 696 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (Download PDF)

Legislation:

  • Senate Bill S515 Post Grant Review (“PGR”) (Download PDF)
  • H.R. Rep. No. 107-120, at 2. Substantial New Question of Patentability (Download PDF)