Outside Counsel

Decisions Suggest That Estoppel Arising From IPR Is Narrower Than Anticipated

, New York Law Journal


Scott W. Doyle, Jonathan R. DeFosse and Arvind Iyengar write that at the time the America Invents Act was enacted, it was widely believed to represent a broad prohibition on later raising prior art invalidity arguments based on any printed publications or patents that could have been included in an inter partes review petition. Over the last year however, courts have suggested that the scope of the IPR estoppel provision is more limited than many originally anticipated.

This premium content is reserved for New York Law Journal subscribers.

Continue reading by getting started with a subscription.

Already a subscriber? Log in now

What's being said

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article #1202780871597

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.