"“It looks to me like, over the years, there's been a creeping reliance...on experts to substitute for something really findable on the face of the prior art.” - Judge Paul Michel"
"“What I want is consistency, transparency, stability, so I'll be neutral on this one. What serves the business is having that stable, consistent, transparent path that we are able to justify and plan for.”"
"“The clear and convincing standard is important in litigation, where the issues are being presented to a jury that isn't technically trained, whereas at the PTAB parties are arguing to technically trained judges and therefore a preponderance standard is appropriate.”"
Panelists at a USPTO PTAB Listening Session focused on PTAB administration and reform and the need to balance benefits for the U.S. IP system. Participants from petitioner and patent owner perspectives, along with academics, IP policy experts, and judges, generally agreed that greater clarity and consistency are the most urgent changes. The session addressed whether the PTAB should change its preponderance of the evidence standard for unpatentability in AIA trials to the clear and convincing standard used in district courts. One view supported keeping preponderance because PTAB proceedings are decided by technically trained judges, while clear and convincing evidence is important in litigation before juries. Another view emphasized business impact, seeking consistency, transparency, stability, and a predictable path for planning.
#ptab-administration #patent-trial-and-appeal-board #aia-trials #evidentiary-standards #ip-policy-reform
Read at IPWatchdog.com | Patents & Intellectual Property Law
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]