Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 03 JANUARY 2018

CAFC: PTAB Abused Its Discretion When It Refused to Admit Expert's Trial Testimony

In Ultratec, Inc. v. CaptionCall, LLC, No. 2016-1706 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 28, 2017), the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded multiple IPR decisions where the PTAB failed to consider material evidence and failed to explain its decisions to exclude the evidence.

United StatesIntellectual Property

In Ultratec, Inc. v. CaptionCall, LLC, No. 2016-1706 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 28, 2017), the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded multiple IPR decisions where the PTAB failed to consider material evidence and failed to explain its decisions to exclude the evidence.

Ultratec and CaptionCall are currently litigating in both district court and before the PTAB.  Ultratec sued CaptionCall for infringement in the Western District of Wisconsin where a jury found the patents infringed and not invalid.  Five months after the verdict, the PTAB issued final written decisions holding all challenged claims of Ultratec's patents were either anticipated or would have been obvious.  The district court subsequently stayed all post-judgment proceedings pending final resolution of the IPRs.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from