Conduct of the proceeding

CurrencyCurrent through May 31, 2023
Citation 37 C.F.R. §42.5

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex
5 cases
  • United Therapeutics Corp. v. Liquidia Techs.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Federal Circuit
    • June 27, 2024
    ...1890, 1890902 (2004). [2] PCT Application No. WO 2005/007081 A9. [3] Such statutory requirement cannot be waived by the Board under 37 C.F.R. § 42.5. [4] Contrary to UTC's contention, Winkler's testimony, including his expressed reasons why a person of ordinary skill would have had any moti......
  • Apple Inc. v. Ericsson Inc.
    • United States
    • Patent Trial and Appeal Board
    • January 29, 2016
    ...not be prejudiced by dismissal. Id. at 3. Under these circumstances, we determine that it is appropriate to dismiss the petitions. See 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.5(a), 42.71(a). This paper does not constitute a final written decision pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 318(a). ORDER In consideration of the forego......
  • Apple Inc. v. Ericsson Inc.
    • United States
    • Patent Trial and Appeal Board
    • January 29, 2016
    ...not be prejudiced by dismissal. Id. at 3. Under these circumstances, we determine that it is appropriate to dismiss the petitions. See 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.5(a), 42.71(a). This paper does not constitute a final written decision pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 318(a). ORDER In consideration of the forego......
  • TRW Automotive U.S. LLC v. Magna Electronics Inc.
    • United States
    • Patent Trial and Appeal Board
    • February 16, 2016
    ...to the challenged patent. Paper 7, at 3-4. Under these circumstances, we determine that it is appropriate to dismiss the petition. See 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.5(a), 42.71(a). This paper does not constitute a final written DECISION pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 318(a). Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the ......
  • Get Started for Free
4 firm's commentaries
  • Delayed Payment Proves Fatal for Cultec’s PTAB Challenge
    • United States
    • JD Supra United States
    • August 5, 2017
    ...and was awarded a filing date of January 6, 2017—one day outside of its one-year window to file. All was not yet lost, however. Under 37 C.F.R. 42.5, the PTAB has discretion to change the filing date of petitions if such a change would “secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive resolution of......
  • Redline Detection, LLC v. Star Envirotech, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2015)
    • United States
    • JD Supra United States
    • January 21, 2016
    ...Envirotech, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2015) Panel: Circuit Judges Lourie, Wallach, and Hughes Opinion by Circuit Judge Wallach Andrew Williams 37 C.F.R. § 42.5 provided the Board discretion in granting related motions. Finally, the Court affirmed the Board's findings that the claims at issue were not......
  • PTAB Pushes Back on Redundant Filings of Same Petitioner
    • United States
    • LexBlog United States
    • April 25, 2019
    ...each patent may place a substantial and unnecessary burden on the Board and Patent Owner. Accordingly, the panel issues this Order under 37 C.F.R. § 42.5 to give the parties an opportunity to focus the Board’s limited resources on genuine issues in dispute. Within 14 days of this Order, Pet......
  • Limitations on New Arguments and Legal Authority Presented at Oral Hearing - Intri-Plex Technologies Inc. v. Saint-Gobain Performance Plastics Rencol Ltd.
    • United States
    • JD Supra United States
    • February 26, 2015
    ...arguments and legal authority not presented in the parties’ papers therefore are not properly presented in the record. Barrington Dyer 37 C.F.R. § 42.5), the Board instructed that the patent owner may address the proper scope of petitioner’s reply, but only during the patent owner’s oral ar......
1 books & journal articles
  • Relevant Statutes and Regulations
    • United States
    • ABA General Library The practitioner’s guide to trials before the patent trial and appeal board
    • October 31, 2016
    ...the party, or (2) Publishing the notice in the Oficial Gazette of the United States Patent and Trademark Ofice or the Federal Register . 37 C.F.R. § 42.5: Conduct of the proceeding (a) The Board may determine a proper course of conduct in a proceeding for any situation not speciically cover......