"The dispute originated from an IPR that Rakuten Rewards, doing business as Ebates Performance Marketing, petitioned for IPR at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), challenging claims of U.S. Patent No. 7,631,346. The patent relates to single sign-on (SSO) technology, which allows a user to access multiple online services with a single set of credentials. Rakuten challenged several claims on grounds of anticipation and obviousness, leading to a mixed decision from the PTAB."
""The CAFC held that the Board's use of terms like "suggests" did not mean it was applying an obviousness standard, but rather that it was explaining its interpretation of the prior art's express disclosures.' - CAFC"
"The CAFC found no fault with the PTAB's claim construction or its analysis of the prior art and rejected IBM's argument that the Board relied on a theory not raised in the initial petition for inter partes review (IPR)."
Rakuten Rewards filed an inter partes review at the PTAB challenging claims of U.S. Patent No. 7,631,346, which covers single sign-on (SSO) technology enabling access to multiple services with one credential set. The PTAB found certain claims unpatentable (claims 1-4, 12-16, and 18-19) and others patentable (claims 5-11, 17, and 20). IBM appealed the unpatentability findings; Zillow, which joined the IPR, cross-appealed the patentability findings. The CAFC affirmed the PTAB's claim constructions and prior-art analysis, rejected IBM's argument about an unraised theory, and referenced the Sunada prior art. The decision was authored by Judge Chen.
Read at IPWatchdog.com | Patents & Intellectual Property Law
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]