Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 04 JUNE 2018

Litigation Continuity Means Earlier Time Bar Date

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) denied petition for inter partes review (IPR) as time barred under 35 USC § 315(b) when a first-filed district court ...

United StatesIntellectual Property

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) denied petition for inter partes review (IPR) as time barred under 35 USC § 315(b) when a first-filed district court complaint was dismissed without prejudice because there was continuity of infringement litigation due to a second complaint filed before the dismissal of the first complaint. Fujifilm Corp. v. Sony Corp., Case No. IPR2018-00060 (PTAB, Apr. 20, 2018) (Paper 8) (Boucher, APJ).

Sony owns a patent directed to a tape cassette that has a magnetic tape and a solid-state memory. Sony filed a patent infringement complaint against Fujifilm in the Southern District of New York. Fujifilm accepted service of the complaint on August 22, 2016. On May 8, 2017, Sony withdrew the patent from the New York action and on the same day filed a new complaint alleging infringement of the patent in the Southern District of Florida. The claims for infringement of the patent were dismissed in the New York action without prejudice on May 9,

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