§

Acxiom Corporation v. Phoenix Licensing LLC

11741225 (P.T.A.B. Nov. 19, 2015)
Acxiom Corporation v. Phoenix Licensing LLC

4 Cited authorities

  1. Section 324 - Institution of post-grant review

    35 U.S.C. § 324   Cited 42 times   57 Legal Analyses
    Requiring threshold determination that it is "more likely than not that at least 1 of the claims . . . is unpatentable"

  2. Section 42.208 - Institution of post-grant review

    37 C.F.R. § 42.208   Cited 5 times   5 Legal Analyses

    (a) When instituting post-grant review, the Board will authorize the review to proceed on all of the challenged claims and on all grounds of unpatentability asserted for each claim. (b) At any time prior to institution of post-grant review, the Board may deny all grounds for unpatentability for all of the challenged claims. Denial of all grounds is a Board decision not to institute post-grant review. (c) Post-grant review shall not be instituted unless the Board decides that the information presented

  3. Section 42.302 - Who may petition for a covered business method patent review

    37 C.F.R. § 42.302   Cited 4 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Stating that a petitioner for CBM review must have been "sued for infringement or ... charged with infringement" and then defining only "charged with infringement"

  4. Section 42.304 - Content of petition

    37 C.F.R. § 42.304   3 Legal Analyses

    In addition to any other notices required by subparts A and C of this part, a petition must request judgment against one or more claims of a patent identified by patent number. In addition to the requirements of §§ 42.6 , 42.8 , 42.22 , and 42.24 the petition must set forth: (a)Grounds for standing. The petitioner must demonstrate that the patent for which review is sought is a covered business method patent, and that the petitioner meets the eligibility requirements of § 42.302 . (b)Identification