Eight Concurrent Petitions Does not Win Sympathy or a Delay

Most Conduct of Proceeding Orders issued by the Board are unremarkable, but in Mobotix Corp. v, e-Watch, Inc., [IPR2013-00499], Paper 16 (Feburary 28, 2014), the patent owner sought a six month delay in the proceedings because it was involved in a total of eight inter partes review proceedings (only one other involving the currently challenged patent, U.S. Patent No. 7,228,429 (IPR2013-00335)).  The Board rejected the delay, noting that delaying the trial for 6 months would mean it could not be completed within the one-year time period required by statute.

The same trick also did not work in Mobotix Corp. v, e-Watch, Inc., [IPR2013-00498], Paper 13 (Feburary 28, 2014), involving U.S. Patent No. 7,023,913, which is also the subject of IPR2013-00337.

This entry was posted in Inter Partes Review by Bryan Wheelock. Bookmark the permalink.

About Bryan Wheelock

Education J.D., Washington University in St. Louis B.S.E. in Mechanical Engineering, Duke University Bryan Wheelock's practice includes preparation and prosecution of patent and trademark applications and drafting of intellectual property agreements, including non-compete agreements. He has brought and defended lawsuits in federal and state courts relating to intellectual property and has participated in seizures of counterfeit and infringing goods. Bryan prepares and prosecutes U.S. and foreign patent applications for medical devices, mechanical and electromechanical devices, manufacturing machinery and processes, metal alloys and other materials. He also does a substantial amount of patentability searching, trademark availability searching and patent and trademark infringement studies. In addition to his practice at Harness Dickey, Bryan is an Adjunct Professor at Washington University School of Law and Washington University School of Engineering.