Foley & Lardner LLP looks beyond the law to focus on the constantly evolving demands facing our clients and their industries. With over 1,100 lawyers in 24 offices across the United States, Mexico, Europe and Asia, Foley approaches client service by first understanding our clients’ priorities, objectives and challenges. We work hard to understand our clients’ issues and forge long-term relationships with them to help achieve successful outcomes and solve their legal issues through practical business advice and cutting-edge legal insight. Our clients view us as trusted business advisors because we understand that great legal service is only valuable if it is relevant, practical and beneficial to their businesses.
Read this article on Foley's PTAB Trial Insights blog for a summary of the Phigenix decision on standing for IPR appeals, and a discussion of some of the issues it raises.
As
I have written previously, neither the statutes nor the
regulations governing Inter Partes Review (IPR) require
the party challenging the patent to have been charged with
infringement, or even to establish any interest in practicing the
claimed subject matter. While the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal
Board (PTAB) has not imposed any standing requirements on IPR
petitioners, the January 9, 2017 Federal
Circuit decision in Phigenix, Inc. v. Immunogen, Inc. shows
that not every petitioner will have standing to
appeal a PTAB IPR decision.
Read
this article on Foley's PTAB Trial Insights blog for a
summary of the Phigenix decision on standing for IPR
appeals, and a discussion of some of the issues it raises.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
