On April 28, Google published a policy statement on the need for specific patent reforms. The statement was published by Google’s General Counsel, Halimah DeLaine Prado, and titled, Reforming the patent system to support American innovation. The statement is a notable read given that it issued from one of the largest Big Tech companies. The statement identifies four concrete areas where patent reform is purportedly required. Behind its prescriptions lingers its agenda—namely, that patents should have no value at all.
Read MoreIn a precedential decision that issued on May 19, ESIP Series 2, LLC v. Puzhen Life USA, LLC, the Federal Circuit confirmed that the Supreme Court’s recent Click-to-Call decision precludes judicial review of decisions by the PTAB concerning real-parties-in-interest. recent Click-to-Call decision precludes judicial review of decisions by the PTAB concerning real-parties-in-interest.
Read MoreIntel recently sued Fortress for antitrust violations based upon its alleged monopolistic aggregation of patents. Intel’s allegations mirror those by Capital One against Intellectual Ventures, which were recently rejected by the Federal Circuit. Over the past several years, any patent assertion has had to contend with certain expected defenses: Alice, IPRs, threats of Octane Fitness. Are antitrust counterclaims the next trend?
Read MoreThe PTAB has issued its first post-AIT decision, Unified Patents, Inc. v. Realtime Adaptive Streaming, LLC. In Realtime, the Patent Owner sought to defeat institution by arguing that Unified has run afoul of the AIT decision by failing to identify all RPIs, namely, its members. The PTAB disagreed and instituted Unified’s IPR. (The institution decision was entered in October, but the redacted decision issued on November 27, 2018). How do we square the AIT decision with the Realtime decision? Will third-party filers, such as Unified and RPX, no longer face RPI issues?
Read MoreThe Federal Circuit recently issued a strong decision instructing the PTAB to rethink the way that it decides who is an RPI (real-party-in-interest). While the decision involved RPX, it presents a more existential threat to Unified Patents, which has risen as one of the most prolific non-party filers of IPRs. Can Unified survive the CAFC’s RPX decision?
Read More