Posts Tagged: Aqua Products v. Matal


To Shift or Not to Shift: Burden Shifting Framework and the PTAB

Earlier this year, in E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. v. Synvina C.V. (Fed. Cir. 2018) (“Dupont v. Synvina”), the Federal Circuit found that the Patent …

Aqua Products: Is It Helping Patent Owners Swim Better Nine Months Later?

At the time, many thought this change in law would significantly assist patentees in avoiding full-blown cancellation of their claims. However, our review suggests a case-by-case analysis …
By Chris Bruno & Arun Mohan
4 months ago 1

Burden to Prove Patentability of Proposed Amended Claims Improperly Shifted to Patent Owner in IPR

The Federal Circuit found that substantial evidence supports the Board’s conclusion that a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine …

Do Recent Decisions Signal a Change in Patent Owner’s Rights to Defend and Amend Claims in Post-Grant Proceedings?

Ever since the introduction of AIA post-grant proceedings, many have questioned whether the procedural deck is stacked against patent owners.  Limits on making claim amendments, having to …
By David Thibodeau
10 months ago 7

Petitioner Must Prove Unpatentability of Patentee’s Substitute Claims in an IPR

Due to the recent decision in Aqua Products v. Matal, 872 F.3d 1290 (Fed. Cir. 2017), the Court disagreed with the Board’s decision to deny Bosch’s motion …

The Year in Patents: The Top 10 Patent Stories from 2017

It is that time once again when we look back on the previous year in preparation to close the final chapter of 2017 in order move fresh into …
By Gene Quinn
12 months ago 14

USPTO Recognizes Federal Circuit’s Aqua Products Decision, Issues Memo on Motions to Amend in IPRs

On November 21, 2017, the USPTO’s Chief Administrative Patent Judge David P. Ruschke issued a memorandum to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) providing guidance on motions …
By John M. Rogitz
1 year ago 5

Amendments in IPRs? Welcome back to the future

The industry reaction to Aqua Products v. Matal has been swift. In IPWatchdog’s Industry Roundup blog post, there was broad acclaim. However, for those involved with …
By Van Lindberg
1 year ago 10

Burden of Persuasion for Patentability of Amended Claims in IPR Stays with Petitioner

After a panel of the Federal Circuit affirmed the Board’s decision, in Aqua Products v. Matal, Aqua requested an en banc rehearing. The USPTO Director Joseph …

Industry Reaction to the Federal Circuit’s Decision in Aqua Products v. Matal

First-take reaction to Aqua Products v. Matal from a distinguished panel of experts. Todd Dickinson: "I don’t think that I’ve ever seen such a collection …
By Gene Quinn
1 year ago 21

Federal Circuit decides Aqua Products, says patentability burden of amended claims on Petitioner

Sitting en banc the Federal Circuit issued a narrow ruling saying that the burden of persuasion must remain at all times on the petitioner, including with respect …
By Gene Quinn
1 year ago 9

Where is the Federal Circuit on Aqua Products?

More than six months have passed since the en banc rehearing in Aqua Products without a decision from the Federal Circuit. It could be an indication that …

Argument in Aqua Products Hints that Federal Circuit May Change PTAB Amendment Practice

Overall, a significant number of the eleven judges present for argument hinted through their questioning that they thought the PTO’s rulemaking was problematic.... The PTO’s …
By Paul Margulies
2 years ago 0

Federal Circuit’s En Banc Review in Aqua Products Could Upend PTAB Amendment Practice

On December 9, 2016, the en banc Federal Circuit will hear argument in In re Aqua Products, Inc. on an issue that has long been troubling patent owners involved …
By Paul Margulies
2 years ago 4

Our website uses cookies to provide you with a better experience. Read our privacy policy for more information.Accept and Close