ARTICLE
3 October 2021

PTAB's Bait-And-Switch Violated The APA

JD
Jones Day

Contributor

Jones Day is a global law firm with more than 2,500 lawyers across five continents. The Firm is distinguished by a singular tradition of client service; the mutual commitment to, and the seamless collaboration of, a true partnership; formidable legal talent across multiple disciplines and jurisdictions; and shared professional values that focus on client needs.
In Baker Hughes Oilfield v. Hirshfeld, the Federal Circuit held that the PTAB violated the Administrative Procedure Act ("APA") by finding certain instituted claims obvious on grounds it had...
United States Intellectual Property
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.

In Baker Hughes Oilfield v. Hirshfeld the Federal Circuit held that the PTAB violated the Administrative Procedure Act ("APA") by finding certain instituted claims obvious on grounds it had indicated in its institution that it would not consider.  The appeal arose from IPR proceedings filed by Innovex Downhole Solutions, Inc. against U.S. Patent No. 9,080,439 ("the '439 patent") owned by Baker Hughes Oilfield.

Read the full article at ptablitigationblog.com.

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.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More