Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 08 APRIL 2016

PTAB Disinclined To Tailor Protective Orders Or Interfere With Protective Orders Issued In Parallel Proceedings

In ASML, the patent owner sought to revise the Board's default protective order to submit documents containing third-party confidential information that the patent owner obtained in a parallel proceeding.

United StatesIntellectual Property

ASML Neth. B.V. v. Energetiq Tech., Inc.

In a pair of orders addressing confidential information acquired in parallel proceedings, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) denied (1) a request to modify the Board's default protective order to protect third-party confidential information, and (2) a request for additional discovery to allow the patent owner to submit petitioner's confidential information subject to a district court protective order. ASML Neth. B.V. v. Energetiq Tech., Inc., IPR Nos. IPR2015-01277; -01279; -01300; -01303; -01377; -01362; -01368; -01375 (PTAB, Feb. 16, 2016) (Parvis, APJ); Meyer Prods., LLC v. Douglas Dynamics, LLC, IPR No. 2015-01247 (PTAB, Feb. 16, 2012) (Worth, APJ).

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