Commenting on the Supreme Court declining to hear an appeal from Apple and Broadcom in the Apple v. Caltech case, Dallas Principal Alfonso Chan pointed out that “the USPTO filed an amicus brief supporting Caltech’s position that statutory estoppel is necessary to ensure IPRs are a cost-effective alternative to district court litigation.” However, he also noted that “just a couple weeks after filing its amicus brief, the USPTO refused to apply statutory estoppel in an IPR involving a patent which a jury found Intel had infringed, and owed $2.2 billion in damages.” In light of these developments, he questions whether “the application of statutory estoppel depend[s] on the identities of the patent owner and IPR petitioner.” Click here to read the full article.


Jump to Page