Intellectual Property Litigation

Claim Amendments: Who Should Bear the Burden of Proving (Un)patentability?

, New York Law Journal


Intellectual Property Litigation columnists Lewis R. Clayton and Eric Alan Stone write: Given the infrequency with which patent owners succeed in amending or substituting for challenged claims, shifting the burden of proving (un)patentability to the petitioner, as was argued before the Federal Circuit on Dec. 9, might have a significant effect on Inter Partes Review practice. We therefore report here on the pending appeal in 'Aqua Products' and the current state of the law, and we offer suggestions for practitioners.

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Continue to Lexis Advance®

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at

What's being said

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

Preparing comment abuse report for Article #1202776509110

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.