Peter Brann Quoted in Leading Patent Blog

IPWatchdog, which bills itself as one of the most-read patent blogs, reached out to counsel who submitted friend-of-the-court briefs and other leading practitioners to comment on the oral argument in the closely-watched U.S. Supreme Court case, United States v. Arthrex, concerning the constitutionality of the Patent and Trademark Appeal Board. Partner Peter Brann’s statement—”Based on...

Peter Brann Speaks to New York IP Association about Supreme Court Case

Partner Peter Brann was one of the featured speakers at a conference held on February 25, 2021, by the New York Intellectual Property Association on the U.S. Supreme Court case of United States v. Arthrex concerning the constitutionality of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). Brann, along with B&I partners, David Swetnam-Burland and Stacy...

Brann & Isaacson Files Supreme Court Amicus Brief in Patent Case

On December 1, 2020, B&I partners, Peter J. Brann, David Swetnam-Burland, and Stacy O. Stitham, filed an amicus curiae brief in the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of two leading golf equipment manufacturers, Acushnet and Roger Cleveland Golf Company, in United States v. Arthrex. The case presents the question whether administrative law judges of the...

Oil States Versus The Administrative State

The Supreme Court has now heard from the petitioner in Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC. At issue is not only the fate of inter partes review of patents by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, but possibly the ability of administrative agencies to review and retract their own erroneous decisions....

What Happens In East Texas Definitely Doesn’t Stay There

This week has witnessed once again the oversized impact the Eastern District of Texas has in patent litigation—after all, that district was home to 44.2% of all patent cases filed in 2015 and 35.4% of all patent cases filed in 2016, with Judge Rodney Gilstrap presiding over an astounding one–quarter of all patent cases filed...

Federal Circuit Clips The Wings of Covered Business Method Review

In an opinion yesterday in Unwired Planet, LLC v. Google Inc., a three–judge panel of the Federal Circuit significantly limited the scope of Patent Office review of business method patents under the America Invents Act. The appellate court shrunk the universe of patents eligible for covered business method (CBM) review, a result which may please...

Supreme Court Affirms Patent Office Procedures For Inter Partes Review

Although the political winds in the Senate continue to blow against the confirmation of a ninth justice, the oddities of an eight–person Supreme Court have not prevented the court from deciding patent cases in the past week. Today brings the opinion of the Court in Cuozzo Speed Technologies v. Lee, in which the high court...

East Texas Court Orders Stay Pending Inter Partes Review

Sometimes, the straightforward application of the law has the power to surprise. The United States Patent and Trademark Office has a process in place, called inter partes review, through which accused infringers can challenge the validity of patents asserted against them in litigation. Inter partes review is an adversary proceeding with a binding effect on...

PTAB Takes Out MPHJ Scanning Patent

Notorious patent troll MPHJ Technology Investments has been in the news and courtrooms a great deal over the past several years. Its rise to prominence began with waves of letters from hard–to–trace affiliates to small businesses demanding that they license the ability to scan documents to send by email. That got the attention of Vermont...

It’s PTAB Week At The Federal Circuit

In a pair of decisions issued this week, the Federal Circuit has opined on the scope and limits of two kinds of administrative challenges to the validity of issued patents that can be filed with the Patent Trial and Appeals Board (PTAB), the administrative tribunal set up to decide such issues. Although the devil may...