View all Webinars

Schwegman Lundberg & Woessner

Close     Close Mobile Menu

Categories

Recent

SLW Earns 2019 National Law Review Go-To Thought Leader Award
Schwegman Lundberg & Woessner has been named a 2019 National...
Lea Westman and Piers Blewett Share IP Strategies at MD&M Event
  When executives and inventors develop medical device technology, there...
Donate Professional Clothing at ChIPs Event to Help Women in Need
For women in need, obtaining professional interview clothing can present...
OutFront Gala Celebrates Progress Toward a Safe, Accepting Environment
Looking for a way to help support a safe, inclusive...
Gain Insights About EP Validation in Nov. 14 Webinar
EP validation has a three-stage process, from acceptance of text,...
Learn Tips for Analytics and Budgeting in Upcoming IPWatchdog Webinars
Process changes can help an organization use funds more wisely....

Fairchild (Taiwan) Corp. v. Power Integrations, Inc.

In my last post, I discussed estoppel in the context in inter partes review, in which defendant filed for IPR after losing in the courts. The Board found the claims-in-suit to be obvious. The Federal Circuit affirmed that the courts and the PTAB could reach different conclusions about patentability.

In Fairchild (Appeal no. 17-1002 (Fed. Cir., April 21, 2017)), the Federal Circuit found the asserted claims to be valid. Power Integrations had earlier filed for inter partes reexamination, using the same references it used in the District Court suit. The Federal Circuit ordered the PTAB to vacate and dismiss the reexamination of the claims found to be valid. Note that this decision rests on the provisions of 35 USC s. 317, which prevents a defendant that lost on invalidity in the courts from bringing the same challenge via inter partes reexamination. Section 317 (pre-AIA) is worded differently than Section 315(e)(2), relating to inter partes review estoppel. Post-AIA, defendant can lose at the district court but faces broad estoppel if it pursues IPR –although, (as in Novartis v. Noven) it can still prevail even if the records are identical (!) My head hurts!

 

This post is from the biotechnology patent law blog www.patents4Life.com.

  Back to All News