Unified Patents Webinar: June 25, 2020, 12:00 pm-1:00 pm EST
Proving Up Printed Publication Status in a Pandemic
We will discuss how to establish a reasonable likelihood that a non-patent document qualifies as a printed publication in IPR proceedings in view of the Board's precedential opinion in Hulu, LLC v. Sound View Innovations, LLC, IPR2018-01039, Paper 29 (PTAB Dec. 20, 2019). We will also look at the challenges of obtaining evidence of public accessibility of documents posed by the pandemic and discuss possible ways to address this issue.
Speaker: Jung Hahm – Senior Patent Counsel, Unified Patents
Jason Skinder – Chief IP Counsel, Connected Enterprises, Honeywell
Raghav Bajaj – Partner, Haynes and Boone
A registration link
https://www.unifiedpatents.com/insights-webinar
Note: This webinar is intended for attorneys involved in Inter Party Review (IPR) procedures at USPTO PTAB, but might be of interest for prior art serches as well. According AIA's 35 U.S.C. 311 (b), invalidity challenges in IPR "could be raised under section 102 or 103 and only on the basis of prior art consisting of patents or printed publications." In cited above PTAB precedential opinion "the Precedential Opinion Panel (POP) concludes that, at institution [of IPR], a petitioner must identify with particularity sufficient evidence to establish a reasonable likelihood that an asserted reference was publicly accessible before the critical date of the challenged patent and thus qualifies as a printed publication.. The POP further clarifies that there is no presumption in ... favor of finding that a reference is a printed publication" (AIPLA Summary Dec. 23, 2019). For more details, see the POP decision IPR2018-01039, Paper 29 and some other documents from the docket IPR2018-01039 (Patent owner Preliminary Response (Paper 10. pp.4-22), Petitioner's Request for Rehearing (Paper 10, p.3-8), Petitioner's Brief In Response To POP Review Order (Paper 17, pp. 8-13), Brief of Amicus Curiae -AIPLA (Paper 19, p.2-3.8-9 [Sec. II,VI]), etc.).