- Avx Corporation v. Greatbatch Ltd.Adverse judgmentPTAB · Jan 14, 2015 · IPR2014-01461 · APJ Jon B Tornquist · IPR · Adverse judgment
The Board granted Patent Owner’s request for adverse judgment, entered judgment against it on claims 1–20, and cancelled those claims.
RulingsAdverse judgment- Adverse judgmentAdverse judgmentGranted
“A party1 may request judgment against itself at any time during a proceeding. 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b). Although not titled as such, we interpret Patent Owner’s Preliminary Response as a request for adverse judgment under 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b). Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Patent Owner’s request for judgment against itself is granted; FURTHER ORDERED that judgment is entered against Patent Owner under 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b) with respect to claims 1–20 of U.S. Patent No. 7,244,279; and FURTHER ORDERED that claims 1–20 of U.S. Patent No. 7,244,279 are CANCELLED.” slip op. at 2
NonePatents in suitUS 7,244,279 - PTAB · Oct 8, 2014 · IPR2014-00284 · APJ Barbara A Benoit · IPR · Adverse judgment
The Board granted Lifeport Sciences’ request for adverse judgment after it disclaimed claims 1-3, 9-18, 23, 27-31, and 33-35.
RulingsAdverse judgment- Adverse judgmentAdverse judgmentGranted
“The Board construes disclaimer of all claims at issue in a trial as a request for adverse judgment. 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b)(2). Because Lifeport Sciences has disclaimed all claims at issue in this proceeding, entry of judgment against it is appropriate. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Lifeport Sciences’ request for judgment against itself with respect to claims 1-3, 9-18, 23, 27-31, and 33-35 of U.S. Patent No. 5,562,728 is granted;” slip op. at 2
NonePatents in suitUS 5,562,728 - Intelligent Bio-Systems, Inc. v. Illumina Cambridge LtdAdverse judgmentPTAB · May 6, 2014 · IPR2013-00518 · APJ Scott E Kamholz · IPR · Adverse judgment
The Board granted Illumina’s request for adverse judgment and entered judgment against it on claims 7 and 11-14 after Illumina disclaimed those claims.
RulingsAdverse judgment- Adverse judgmentAdverse judgmentGranted
“The Board construes cancellation of all claims at issue in a trial as a request for adverse judgment. 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b)(2). Because Illumina has cancelled all claims at issue in this proceeding, entry of judgment against it is appropriate. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Illumina’s request for judgment against itself with respect to claims 7 and 11-14 of U.S. Patent No. 7,566,517 is granted; and FURTHER ORDERED that judgment is entered herein against Illumina with respect to claims 7 and 11-14 of U.S. Patent No. 7,566,517.” slip op. at 2
NonePatents in suitUS 7,566,537
Holdings, summaries, rulings, issues, outcomes, winners and claim constructions shown for a decision were generated by a large language model reading the opinion. They are a guide to the decision, not the decision. Confirm every one against the court's own text before relying on it. Outcomes read from the patent owner’s side. Party names are extracted from the decision and are missing on about 900 short Director denials and scans, which carry the trial number instead.