It is not surprising that the Federal Circuit has taken the opportunity to apply the Supreme Court's recent precedent in Amgen v. Sanofi regarding the sufficiency of disclosure needed.
Drafting the expert declaration is another critical task for Patent Owners during the
inter partes review (“IPR”) discovery period. As noted in our previous post, IPR expert witnesses provide declarations as affirmative testimony in lieu of live testimony before the Board at the hearing. Because the expert witness will not be able to provide live testimony before the Board, expert declarations are the final evidence of the experts’ opinions, as there is no opportunity to correct misstatements or mistakes. Due to the procedural schedule of the IPR system, Patent Owners have the unique opportunity to file their expert declarations
after deposing Petitioners’ experts, providing a significant strategic advantage.
Advertisement
Patent Owner Tip #3 for Surviving An Instituted IPR: How Patent Owner Experts Go from Zero to Hero Thursday, April 22, 2021
Drafting the expert declaration is another critical task for Patent Owners during the
inter partes review (“IPR”) discovery period. As noted in our previous post, IPR expert witnesses provide declarations as affirmative testimony in lieu of live testimony before the Board at the hearing. Because the expert witness will not be able to provide live testimony before the Board, expert declarations are the final evidence of the experts’ opinions, as there is no opportunity to correct misstatements or mistakes. Due to the procedural schedule of the IPR system, Patent Owners have the unique opportunity to file their expert declarations
To embed, copy and paste the code into your website or blog:
The year 2020 brought significant change to many sectors of life, and patent law was no exception. Throughout the year, the U.S. Supreme Court and the Federal Circuit handed down several notable decisions that have and will continue to create significant impact on patent litigation. A selection of these decisions is discussed below:
Supreme Court Reinforces PTAB’s Authority for Matters Closely Tied to IPR Institution:
Thryv Inc. v. Click-To-Call Technologies LP & ESIP Series 2 LLC v. Puzhen Life USA LLC
On April 20, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)’s time-bar determination for