E-mail Newsletter

  • Enter your e-mail address below to receive the "Patent Docs" e-mail newsletter.

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Contact the Docs

Docs on Twitter


About the Authors

  • The Authors and Contributors of "Patent Docs" are patent attorneys and agents, many of whom hold doctorates in a diverse array of disciplines.

Disclaimer

  • "Patent Docs" does not contain any legal advice whatsoever. This weblog is for informational purposes only, and its publication does not create an attorney-client relationship. In addition, nothing on "Patent Docs" constitutes a solicitation for business. This weblog is intended primarily for other attorneys. Moreover, "Patent Docs" is the personal weblog of the Authors; it is not edited by the Authors' employers or clients and, as such, no part of this weblog may be so attributed. All posts on "Patent Docs" should be double-checked for their accuracy and current applicability.

Pharma-50-transparent_216px_red

Become a Fan

« Court Report | Main | A Sea Change for IPRs? -- Part II »

June 09, 2015

Comments

What good is allowing affidavits from either side if neither side can conduct cross-examination?

Head Scratcher, this is about the filing of the initial petition pleading papers requesting [and any objecting to] initiation of an IPR before any IPR is actually initiated. If an IPR is actually initiated [and quite a few are not] then indeed there is affidavit cross-examination opportunity.

Any thought going towards the request for IPR's initiated by hedge funds with the intent to manipulate stock prices?

Paul F. Morgan,

Would you care to comment on the fact that the initiation itself of an IPR (unchallengeable, by the way) is itself a taking of certain portions of a duly granted property right?

The comments to this entry are closed.

May 2017

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31