Jiaxiao Zhang Jiaxiao Zhang

Subscribe to Jiaxiao Zhang's Posts
Jiaxiao Zhang focuses her practice on intellectual property litigation matters. Jiaxiao has experience in federal district court actions in California, Texas, and Florida, and proceedings before the US Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) of the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). Read Jiaxiao Zhang's full bio.

Reprints Do Not Change Earlier Publication Date


By on Dec 10, 2020
Posted In Patents

Addressing the entirety of the evidence standard, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a Patent Trial and Appeal Board finding that responsive evidence can be properly considered to demonstrate the public availability of a reference relied upon in an inter partes review (IPR) petition. VidStream LLC v. Twitter, Inc., Case Nos....

Continue Reading



Federal Circuit Will Not Second-Guess IPR Institution Denials


By on Nov 11, 2020
Posted In America Invents Act, Patents

In a series of non-precedential orders, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reiterated that it lacks jurisdiction to hear appeals on whether the Patent Trial and Appeal Board properly decided to deny inter partes review (IPR) petitions based on parallel district court litigation. Cisco Systems Inc. v. Ramot at Tel Aviv University,...

Continue Reading



PTO Seeks Comments on Proposed Rulemaking for Denying Patent Reviews


By on Oct 29, 2020
Posted In America Invents Act, Patents

The US Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) requested public comments on considerations for instituting trials under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA). Comments are due by November 19, 2020. Patent practitioners have grown accustomed to reviewing the PTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Board) administrative guide, precedential or informative opinions, and other published filings and...

Continue Reading



One Claim Construction Error Is Enough to Trigger New Trial on Infringement


By on Oct 8, 2020
Posted In Patents, Technology

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit re-affirmed that incorrect construction of even a single claim element can be grounds for a new trial on infringement. Network-1 Technologies, Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Company, Case Nos. 18-2338, -2339, -2395, -2396 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 24, 2020) (Prost, C.J.). Network-1 Technologies sued Hewlett-Packard (HP) for patent infringement....

Continue Reading



No Refunds: Cancellation of Patent Claims in IPR Isn’t a Taking


By on Sep 3, 2020
Posted In America Invents Act

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that cancellation of a patent in an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding is not a taking and does not grant the patentee any compensable claim against the United States. Christy, Inc. v. United States, Case No. 19-1738 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 24, 2020) (Hughes, J.). After Christy...

Continue Reading



Check Step One: It’s Not Ova until the Court Compares Claims


By on Aug 13, 2020
Posted In Patents

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a district court’s decision finding a patent directed to a method of sorting particles using flow cytometry technology ineligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The Federal Circuit also vacated the district court’s conclusion that the patent owner was precluded from asserting certain patents based on...

Continue Reading



Joined Parties Have Rights Too


By on Jul 22, 2020
Posted In America Invents Act, Patents

In vacating an unpatentability decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Board), the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that the rights of a joined party to an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding applies to the entirety of the proceedings and includes the right of appeal. Fitbit, Inc. v. Valencell, Inc.,...

Continue Reading



The “Plotting” Thickens: Claims that Solve Known Problem with Known Methods Are Obvious


By on May 14, 2020
Posted In America Invents Act, Patents

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit applied KSR and its obviousness progeny, finding that patent claims directed to location plotting were obvious under 35 USC § 103. Uber Techs., Inc. v. X One, Inc., Case No. 19-1164 (Fed. Cir. May 5, 2020) (Prost, CJ). X One sued Uber Technologies asserting a patent...

Continue Reading



Patent’s Explicit Description of Claimed Advantages Defeats § 101 Challenge


By on Apr 30, 2020
Posted In Patents

Reversing a district court’s motion to dismiss, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found patent claims directed to cardiac monitoring devices patent eligible under 35 USC § 101 because the claims were directed to a technical improvement to the function of such devices. CardioNet, LLC v. InfoBionic, Inc., Case No. 19-1149 (Fed....

Continue Reading



Exercise of Institution Discretion During Parallel AIA and District Court Challenges


By on Apr 15, 2020
Posted In Patents

The Patent and Trial Appeal Board (PTAB) Precedential Opinion Panel (POP) refused to revisit an earlier PTAB panel decision, reiterating that it remains within the discretion of a PTAB panel to deny institution on a patent challenge because of a pending trial in federal district court. Sand Revolution II, LLC v. Continental Intermodal Group –...

Continue Reading



BLOG EDITORS

STAY CONNECTED

TOPICS

ARCHIVES