Joseph Robinson

Robert Schaffer

Joseph Robinson has over 20 years of experience in all aspects of intellectual property law. He focuses his practice in the pharmaceutical, life sciences, biotechnology, and medical device fields. His practice encompasses litigation, including Hatch-Waxman litigation; licensing; counseling; due diligence; and patent and trademark prosecution. He has served as litigation counsel in a variety of patent and trademark disputes in many different jurisdictions, and has also served as appellate counsel before the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Joe also focuses on complex inter partes matters before the U.S Patent and Trademark Office, inventorship disputes, reexaminations and reissues. His experience includes numerous interferences, a particular advantage in new U.S. Patent and Trademark Office post-grant proceedings. He also counsels on patent–related U.S. Food and Drug Administration issues, including citizen petitions, Orange Book listing, and trademark issues. For more information and to contact Joe please visit his profile page at the Troutman Sanders website.


Posts by Joseph Robinson


Supreme Court Holds PTAB Must Decide Validity of All Challenged Claims in IPRs

As in civil litigation, the petitioner in an inter partes review is master of its complaint and is “normally entitled to judgment on all of the claims …

Federal Circuit Allows USPTO to Defend Appeal from Inter Partes Reexamination

In Knowles Elecs. LLC v. Iancu, Knowles appealed the inter partes reexamination decision of the Board, which affirmed an examiner’s finding that certain claims were anticipated …

Conclusory approach to obviousness by PTAB in IPR insufficient to render claims invalid

The Federal Circuit found that the Board failed to provide sufficient explanation for its obviousness finding, instead using a conclusory approach that asked whether the missing limitation …

Federal Circuit applies collateral estoppel where prior IPR previously construed related claim

Collateral estoppel is not limited to identical patent claims or claims within a single patent and may preclude a contradictory construction of a claim term already construed …

Federal Circuit Affirmed Obviousness of ‘435 Patent Claims

The broadest reasonable construction of “sterilant concentration levels” encompassed both the “gas laden” (or “in air”) sterilant levels and the residual sterilant levels. Nothing in the specification …

BRI does not allow unfettered license to disregard inventor’s description of the invention

The Court took issue with the PTO’s construction of “coupled.” While the “broadest reasonable interpretation” applies at the PTO, that interpretation must be consistent with the …

PCT Species Claim Sufficient to Support Priority Claim of Later-filed Genus Claim

The issue was whether the PCT, which disclosed a “connection to fibre optics bundle which provides for lighting” was a sufficient written description to support the “light …

PTAB Not Required to Consider New Evidence or Arguments at Oral Argument

The Board is not compelled by Federal Circuit precedent or PTO guidelines to consider arguments and evidence presented for the first time during oral argument. However, if …

Holder for Car Camera Does Not Infringe Patent for Removable Book Holder

in Ottah v. Fiat Chrysler, Chikezie Ottah appealed the lower court’s grant of summary judgment of non-infringement and dismissal of the complaint with prejudice. Ottah’s …

Preclusion Applies Only If Scope of Patent Claims in Both Suits are Essentially the Same

In SimpleAir v. Google, The district court found claim preclusion applied because the patents at issue had the same title and specification as previously litigated patents, SimpleAir …

Federal Circuit Affirms PTAB’s Rejection of Claims Despite Earlier CAFC Validation

Although the majority opinion was silent with respect to a prior claim construction by the Federal Circuit relating to the patent, Judge Newman wrote in dissent that …

Disputed Claim Construction Not Suitable for Resolution on a Motion to Dismiss

Nalco asserted that the only difference between its patented method and the Chem-Mod Process was the location of the injection. The district court dismissed Nalco's complaints for …

Factual Allegations on Inventive Concept Preclude Dismissal of Complaint Under § 101

In Atrix Software v. Green Shades Software, Aatrix sued Green Shades for infringement, and Green Shades moved to dismiss. The district court granted the motion, holding: (1) claim 1 …

Despite Discovery Violations, Amneal Prevails on against Merck in Nasonex Patent Dispute

Merck appealed the lower court’s finding of non-infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,127,353 (“the ‘353 patent”), which is directed toward mometasone furoate monohydrate (“MFM”), commercially used in …

Federal Circuit vacates PTAB decision for failure to explain reason claims were invalid

Unlike the Board’s anticipation determinations, which contravened the only permissible findings that could be drawn from the prior art under the proper constructions of the relevant …