Self-Harm: Company’s own 102(e) prior art Cancels the Patent

by Dennis Crouch Duncan Parking Techs., Inc. v. IPS Group, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2019) andIPS Group, Inc. v. Duncan Solutions Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2019) This decision involves parallel appeals from (1) a district court siding with the accused infringer on noninfringement grounds; and (2)  a PTAB IPR decision siding with the patentee confirming patentability. On appeal, the accused infringer won on several grounds, but it appears that at least some of the claims will be found both infringed and valid. In this post, I focus on the PTAB decision and self-harming prior art. 0=  The two patents in suit are related to single-space, credit-card enabled, solar-powered parking meters. U.S. Patents 8,595,054 and 7,854,310.  Of the two, the ‘054 patent has the earlier effective filing date (December 2006) while the ‘310 patent’s associated application was not filed until 14 months later (February 2008).  The two patents are both owned by IPS and…

Read more detail on Recent Intellectual Property Law posts –

This entry was posted in Intellectual Property and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply