[null, null, {"document_url": "https://polsinellionpostgrant.com/?offset=1496435814401", "unformatted_src": "https://static1.squarespace.com/static/58fe5909579fb36549cdf902/58fe5b6e03596e6cc947f82d/5931ca3abf629a5d49f36a5e/1496697738838/Products+Liability_99146219.jpg", "src": "https://static1.squarespace.com/static/58fe5909579fb36549cdf902/58fe5b6e03596e6cc947f82d/5931ca3abf629a5d49f36a5e/1496697738838/Products+Liability_99146219.jpg", "formatted_filename": "Products Liability", "alt_text": "Attack On Pharma Patents: Checking In On The Kyle Bass IPRs"}, null, {"document_url": "https://polsinellionpostgrant.com/?offset=1496435814401", "unformatted_src": "https://static1.squarespace.com/static/58fe5909579fb36549cdf902/58fe5b6e03596e6cc947f82d/5901fb6c8419c2cdde1545ee/1496697667355/warning+horn_EDITED.jpg", "src": "https://static1.squarespace.com/static/58fe5909579fb36549cdf902/58fe5b6e03596e6cc947f82d/5901fb6c8419c2cdde1545ee/1496697667355/warning+horn_EDITED.jpg", "formatted_filename": "warning horn EDITED", "alt_text": "Polsinelli PTAB Notes: 5 Takeaway Points From the First Ever PTABBar Conference and First PTABBar Webinar"}, null, {"document_url": "https://polsinellionpostgrant.com/?offset=1496435814401", "unformatted_src": "https://static1.squarespace.com/static/58fe5909579fb36549cdf902/58fe5b6e03596e6cc947f82d/5901f12f5016e1a537723d61/1496697699259/multi-directional+red+sign.jpg", "src": "https://static1.squarespace.com/static/58fe5909579fb36549cdf902/58fe5b6e03596e6cc947f82d/5901f12f5016e1a537723d61/1496697699259/multi-directional+red+sign.jpg", "formatted_filename": "multi directional red sign", "alt_text": "Stays in Litigation Pending IPR or CBM Review Vary Significantly Based On Jurisdiction"}, null]
Polsinelli on Post-Grant Polsinelli on Post-Grant  |  Intellectual Property Blog

Polsinelli on Post-Grant RSS By: Jeffrey Kuo and Afia Naaz
Edited by: Margaux Savee

Kyle Bass is a hedge fund manager who developed a strategy to attack pharmaceutical companies and their patents.  Bass, through various entities and more recently in his own name, files and publicizes the filings of Inter Partes Reviews (IPRs), challenging the patentability of a pharmaceutical patent in the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).  At the same time, Bass would bet that the threat of invalidation of the patent would cause the company’s stock price to drop; he would short sell the company’s stock or invest in other companies that would benefit if the patents deemed unpatentable. He calls this an “activist short strategy.” So far, Bass and his affiliates have filed 36 IPRs against 16 different pharmaceutical companies.

Why is he doing this?  Click to read more.
 By: Ryan Murphy

On March 1-3, 2017 the PTABBar Association had its first annual conference. The conference started with a “Bootcamp” for attorneys, which explained the different proceedings available at the Office, with special focus on the Inter Partes Review Proceeding. The Conference then proceeded to address the current state of proceedings before the Office and address important issues facing the Bar. Prior to the PTABBar Conference, the Association also produced and distributed a Webinar. Here we share a list of topics that we found interesting, along with summaries of how those topics were addressed by the Speakers of each event.
 
Inter partes review (“IPR”) and covered business method patent review (“CBM”) are useful tools for a defendant accused of infringing a patent in a district court litigation. IPRs and CBMs allow defendants to use an administrative process to determine validity, instead of relying solely on the courts.  Pursuing unpatentability via an IPR or CBM rather than within the district court is generally advantageous due to the shortened timeline, expertise of the agency, and lower costs associated with IPRs and CBMs.  Pursuing an IPR or CBM during a pending patent litigation may also provide the defendant an additional benefit – a litigation stay.  A litigation stay is advantageous to a defendant for many reasons, primarily due to the potential of cancelling the claims asserted in litigation in a timely and economic manner.





