In the latest edition of their Law360 column on noteworthy Federal Circuit rulings, partners Sean Murray and Jeremiah Helm examine the recent decision in Sage Products v. Stewart.
The Federal Circuit’s ruling affirmed an earlier decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) which “affords petitioners in [inter partes review] proceedings greater latitude in the type of evidence they may present and when they may present it,” according to Murray and Helm.
Speaking to the significance of the court’s ruling, the authors observe that the decision affords practitioners more flexibility in selecting evidence to establish the unpatentability of the challenged claims: “Petitioners do not need to anticipate — at the time they file their petitions — all of the prior art documents they will need to prove invalidity.”
Murray and Helm conclude that the decision in Sage Products is “a boon to those seeking to invalidate a patent in an IPR proceeding.”
Read the full article here.
