{"id":2180,"date":"2018-08-16T13:40:54","date_gmt":"2018-08-16T17:40:54","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/?p=2180"},"modified":"2018-09-03T13:59:29","modified_gmt":"2018-09-03T17:59:29","slug":"federal-circuit-vacates-another-ipr-as-time-barred","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/?p=2180","title":{"rendered":"Federal Circuit Vacates Another IPR as Time-Barred"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><a href=\"http:\/\/www.cafc.uscourts.gov\/sites\/default\/files\/opinions-orders\/17-1629.Opinion.8-16-2018.pdf\">Luminara Worldwide, LLC v. Iancu<\/a>, [2017-1629, 2017-1631, 2017-1633] (August 16, 2018), the Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB&#8217;s invalidation of claims of two of Luminara&#8217;s patent, and as to the third, it vacated the Final Written Decision, and remanding for\u00a0dismissal\u00a0of that IPR, because of the section \u00a7315(b) time-bar.<\/p>\n<p>In instituting the IPR, the Board rejected the\u00a0argument was untimely under \u00a7315(b) because the first action had been voluntarily\u00a0dismissed without prejudice. \u00a0Because the section 315(b) time-bar applies\u00a0when the underlying complaint alleging infringement has<br \/>\nbeen voluntarily dismissed without prejudice, the Federal Circuit said the Board\u00a0erred in instituting the IPR challenging the \u2019319 patent, vacating the Board\u2019s final written decision as to the \u2019319\u00a0IPR and remand for dismissal of that IPR.<\/p>\n<p>As to the obviousness in the other two IPRs, the Federal Circuit found that these were supported by substantial evidence.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Luminara Worldwide, LLC v. Iancu, [2017-1629, 2017-1631, 2017-1633] (August 16, 2018), the Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB&#8217;s invalidation of claims of two of Luminara&#8217;s patent, and as to the third, it vacated the Final Written Decision, and remanding for\u00a0dismissal\u00a0of that &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/?p=2180\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[26,1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2180","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-inter-partes-review","category-uncategorized"],"post_mailing_queue_ids":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2180","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=2180"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2180\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2182,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2180\/revisions\/2182"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=2180"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=2180"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=2180"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}