Post-Grant Patents – IP Law Watch

Let’s Make it a Date–Best Method and the Filing Date of the Earliest Complete Application

Aug 11 2025

In the recent decision of NOCO Company v. Brown and Watson International Pty Ltd [2025] FCA 887¹, Moshinsky J has provided welcomed clarity around the relevant date by which the best method known to the applicant is to be identified for divisional patent applications. Namely, the relevant date is the date from which the term of the patent is calculated. This means that for divisional patent applications, it is the filing date of the earliest complete or PCT application, not the individual filing date of each divisional application. And thus, it is at the time of filing the PCT application that the best method known to the applicant needs to be included in the specification.

USPTO Director Ends IPR Against Midas Green Technologies

Jul 27 2025

On 25 July 2025, K&L Gates secured an important win for its client, Midas Green Technologies, LLC. Acting USPTO Director Coke Morgan Stewart granted Director review and denied institution of an inter partes review (IPR) petition filed by Midas Green’s competitor, Green Revolution Cooling, Inc., which had sought to invalidate U.S. Patent No. 10,405,457—currently being asserted by Midas Green in a parallel lawsuit pending in the Western District of Texas. The patent describes a modular immersion cooling system that circulates dielectric fluid to cool vertically mounted electronic appliances, such as computer servers, in a tank.

Return to In-Person Patent Trial and Appeal Board Hearings

Jul 23 2025

Effective 1 September 2025, all hearings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) will be conducted in person. Parties involved must attend these hearings physically and in person unless they can demonstrate a valid reason for not doing so. Acceptable justifications typically include situations such as significant financial difficulty for the arguing attorneys, medical issues, or similar substantial barriers to travel.

First Denial Based on USPTO’s New Discretionary Denial Factors

Jun 13 2025

Earlier this year, Chief Judge Boalick issued guidance on the USPTO’s recission of “Interim Procedure for Discretionary Denials in AIA Post-Grant Proceedings with Parallel District Court Litigation,” explaining how the Fintiv factors should be addressed going forward. Shortly after, Acting Director Stewart issued a memorandum titled “Interim Processes for PTAB Workload Management” that provided additional non-Fintiv discretionary factors that should be assessed to determine whether discretionary denial of an IPR petition is appropriate.

Best Method Challenge Continues to Offer “a Material Advantage” – Zoetis Services LLC v Boehringer Ingelheim Animal Health USA Inc [2024] FCAFC 145

Mar 27 2025

Finding against Zoetis, the Full Federal Court held that Zoetis’ three patent applications relating to pig vaccines were invalid due to the failure to disclose the best method.

Tag:Post-Grant Patents