Search Team

Search by Last Name
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
Y
Z

Luminara Worldwide, LLC v. Iancu

IPR Institution Decision Sufficiently Disclosed Obviousness Rationale

Luminara Worldwide, LLC v. Iancu, __ F.3d __, 2018 WL 3892991 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 16, 2018) (Lourie, DYK, Taranto) (PTAB) (2 of 5 stars)

Fed Cir vacates IPR decision of unpatentability as to one patent, affirms as to a second. For the first patent, per Click-to-Call, __ F.3d __ (Fed. Cir. Aug. 16, 2018), the IPR petition was time-barred due to Luminara’s 2012 service of a complaint against the petitioner Liown, subsequently dismissed by consent of the parties. As to Luminara’s second patent, the opinion rejects Luminara’s argument that it did not receive sufficient notice of the obviousness theory the Board ultimately applied. The opinion analyzes the institution decision and reasons that it sufficiently disclosed the theory ultimately relied on.

KEYWORDS: INTER PARTES REVIEW; TIME BAR; OBVIOUSNESS (YES)