Savvy Dog Systems, LLC

9 Cited authorities

  1. Versata Development Group, Inc. v. SAP America, Inc.

    793 F.3d 1306 (Fed. Cir. 2015)   Cited 116 times   43 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "the definition of ‘covered business method patent’ is not limited to products and services of only the financial industry, or to patents owned by or directly affecting the activities of financial institutions"
  2. Blue Calypso, LLC v. Groupon, Inc.

    815 F.3d 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2016)   Cited 72 times   12 Legal Analyses
    Holding that petitioner failed to carry its burden of proving public accessibility of the allegedly invalidating reference
  3. Vectra Fitness, Inc. v. TNWK Corp.

    162 F.3d 1379 (Fed. Cir. 1998)   Cited 46 times   5 Legal Analyses
    In Vectra Fitness, although the PTO added a terminal disclaimer to the prosecution history, it failed to enter the terminal disclaimer on the cover page or contents page of the prosecution history, and failed to publish the terminal disclaimer in the Offi- cial Gazette as contemplated by PTO regulations.
  4. Unwired Planet, LLC v. Google Inc.

    841 F.3d 1376 (Fed. Cir. 2016)   Cited 16 times   16 Legal Analyses
    In Unwired Planet we found that no such extra-statutory sources were persuasive when the plain words of the statute did not support such additional interpretive phrases.
  5. Section 253 - Disclaimer

    35 U.S.C. § 253   Cited 180 times   38 Legal Analyses
    Granting patentee authority to disclaim issued or pending claims
  6. Section 324 - Institution of post-grant review

    35 U.S.C. § 324   Cited 42 times   58 Legal Analyses
    Requiring threshold determination that it is "more likely than not that at least 1 of the claims . . . is unpatentable"
  7. Section 42.4 - Notice of trial

    37 C.F.R. § 42.4   Cited 54 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Stating that "[t]he Board institutes the trial on behalf of the Director"
  8. Section 42.301 - Definitions

    37 C.F.R. § 42.301   Cited 21 times   56 Legal Analyses
    Defining the scope of CBM review
  9. Section 42.300 - Procedure; pendency

    37 C.F.R. § 42.300   Cited 13 times   10 Legal Analyses

    (a) A covered business method patent review is a trial subject to the procedures set forth in subpart A of this part and is also subject to the post-grant review procedures set forth in subpart C except for §§ 42.200 , 42.201 , 42.202 , and 42.204 . (b) In a covered business method patent review proceeding, a claim of a patent, or a claim proposed in a motion to amend under § 42.221 , shall be construed using the same claim construction standard that would be used to construe the claim in a civil