• Kvk-Tech, Inc. / Flat Line Capital, LLC v. Silvergate Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Adverse judgment
  PTAB · May 7, 2018 · PGR2017-00039 · APJ Grace Karaffa Obermann · PGR · Adverse judgment

  The Board entered adverse judgment against Petitioner after the parties agreed Petitioner had abandoned its challenge to claims 1–13.

  RulingsAdverse judgment

  • Adverse judgmentAdverse judgmentGranted

    “DISCUSSION A party may request entry of adverse judgment against itself at any time during a proceeding. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b). On April 16, 2018, the parties filed a Joint Motion for Adverse Judgment against Petitioner. Paper 16 (“Joint Motion”). On May 3, 2018, the parties indicated that they “jointly continue to consent to entry of adverse judgment against” Petitioner as advanced in the Joint Motion. Paper 18, 1. The parties direct us to 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b)(4), which we construe as an admission that Petitioner has abandoned the contest. Paper 16, 1; Paper 18, 1. CONCLUSION Under these circumstances, entry of judgment adverse to Petitioner is appropriate, and thus, granted. It is ORDERED that adverse judgment is entered against Petitioner under 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b)(4); and” slip op. at 2

  • PTAB / AIA Trials › Motions to amend / substitute claimsGranted

    “On May 3, 2018, with our prior authorization, the parties filed a Joint Motion to Limit the Petition. Paper 18. Concurrently herewith, we issue an order granting the parties’ Joint Motion to Limit the Petition to remove the two grounds of unpatentability based on 35 U.S.C. § 112, leaving the challenge to claims 1–13 based on 35 U.S.C. § 103 as the sole ground remaining in dispute.” slip op. at 2

  None
  Patents in suitUS 9,463,183
• Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. v. Schlumberger Technology Corp.Adverse judgment
  PTAB · Jan 31, 2018 · IPR2017-01777 · APJ Patrick R Scanlon · IPR · Adverse judgment

  The Board denied institution because Patent Owner recorded a statutory disclaimer of all challenged claims.

  RulingsAdverse judgment

  • Adverse judgmentAdverse judgmentDenied

    “Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.107(e), “patent owner may file a statutory disclaimer under 35 U.S.C. 253(a) in compliance with § 1.321(a) of this chapter, disclaiming one or more claims in the patent” and “[n]o inter partes review will be instituted based on disclaimed claims.” A disclaimer under 35 U.S.C. § 253(a) is “considered as part of the original patent” once it is “recorded” in the Office. 35 U.S.C. § 253(a).” slip op. at 3

  Discretionary denial
  Patents in suitUS 8,167,043

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.