Update on IPR Estoppel
Estoppel applies to grounds not in IPR petition. Estoppel applies for all grounds not in petition for claims challenged in a petition. See California Institute of Technology v. Broadcom Limited, et al., 20-2222, Feb. 4, 2022 and Feb. 22, 2022 errata sheet.
Estoppel does not apply to claims not challenged. The CAFC held that estoppel arising on a final written decision in two simultaneously filed IPRs required dismissal of a third simultaneously filed IPR which asserted different grounds against the same claims. The court noted that petitioner could have filed multiple petitions addressing different subsets of the claims, as opposed to different subsets of the grounds. In so doing, the court indicated that IPR estoppel “applies on a claim-by-claim basis.” Intuitive Surgical v. Ethicon, 2022 WL 414252, Feb. 11, 2022.
While we are pleased to have you contact us by telephone, surface mail, electronic mail, or by facsimile transmission, contacting Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP or any of its attorneys does not create an attorney-client relationship. The formation of an attorney-client relationship requires consideration of multiple factors, including possible conflicts of interest. An attorney-client relationship is formed only when both you and the Firm have agreed to proceed with a defined engagement.
DO NOT CONVEY TO US ANY INFORMATION YOU REGARD AS CONFIDENTIAL UNTIL A FORMAL CLIENT-ATTORNEY RELATIONSHIP HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED.
If you do convey information, you recognize that we may review and disclose the information, and you agree that even if you regard the information as highly confidential and even if it is transmitted in a good faith effort to retain us, such a review does not preclude us from representing another client directly adverse to you, even in a matter where that information could be used against you.