Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 22 OCTOBER 2014

PTAB And Discovery: An Insider’s Perspective

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
Contributor
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP is one of the world’s largest firms focusing on...

View firm profile
Explore more from Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP

Recently, APJs Bonilla and Snedden authored a post on the USPTO AIA Blog entitled "Routine and Additional Discovery in AIA Trial Proceedings: What is the Difference?"

United StatesIntellectual Property

Recently, APJs Bonilla and Snedden authored a post on the USPTO AIA Blog entitled "Routine and Additional Discovery in AIA Trial Proceedings: What is the Difference?" Their post provides some meaningful insight into how the PTAB approaches routine and additional discovery and cites numerous decisions that may be useful to practitioners.

The APJs explain that "routine discovery" under Rule 42.51(b)(1)(i) has its limitations. While exhibits cited in a paper or testimony must be produced, no requirement exists for a party to create or provide materials that were not cited. Nor are parties required to produce materials that a party or witness considered in preparing the paper or the testimony.

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