§

Applications In Internet Time LLC

IPR2015-01752 (P.T.A.B. Dec. 4, 2020)
Applications In Internet Time LLC

10 Cited authorities

  1. Thryv, Inc. v. Click-To-Call Techs.

    140 S. Ct. 1367 (2020)   Cited 36 times   57 Legal Analyses
    Holding that departure in language shows a departure in meaning

  2. Belden Inc. v. Berk-Tek LLC

    805 F.3d 1064 (Fed. Cir. 2015)   Cited 115 times   21 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a declaration appended to a reply brief "fairly respond[ed] only to arguments made in ... [the patent owner]'s response," as required by § 42.23(b), and that the patent owner had "a meaningful opportunity to respond," as required by the APA

  3. SAS Institute, Inc. v. ComplementSoft, LLC.

    825 F.3d 1341 (Fed. Cir. 2016)   Cited 49 times   30 Legal Analyses
    Identifying an APA violation where parties did not dispute the claim construction the Board adopted at institution but the Board adopted a significantly different claim construction in its final written decision without any further discussion or briefing

  4. Abbott Labs. v. Cordis Corp.

    710 F.3d 1318 (Fed. Cir. 2013)   Cited 46 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing that the AIA changed the PTO's review process from “an examinational to an adjudicative proceeding”

  5. Applications in Internet Time, LLC v. RPX Corp.

    897 F.3d 1336 (Fed. Cir. 2018)   Cited 15 times   18 Legal Analyses
    Reviewing the real party in interest requirement

  6. New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution v. United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission

    582 F.2d 87 (1st Cir. 1978)   Cited 23 times
    In New England Coalition v. Nuclear Regulatory Com'n., 582 F.2d 87 (1st Cir. 1978), the licensing board of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) held extensive hearings before its chairperson left the NRC. A new chairperson continued the hearings.

  7. Gamble-Skogmo, Inc. v. Federal Trade Comm

    211 F.2d 106 (8th Cir. 1954)   Cited 37 times
    Noting de novo review by substituted examiner would have been unnecessary had the decision not relied upon credibility determinations requiring seeing and hearing witnesses' testimony

  8. Section 554 - Adjudications

    5 U.S.C. § 554   Cited 1,050 times   32 Legal Analyses
    Granting authority to agencies to "issue a declaratory order to terminate a controversy or remove uncertainty."

  9. Section 315 - Relation to other proceedings or actions

    35 U.S.C. § 315   Cited 552 times   898 Legal Analyses
    Permitting the Director to consolidate separate IPRs challenging the same patent

  10. Section 42.71 - Decision on petitions or motions

    37 C.F.R. § 42.71   Cited 22 times   44 Legal Analyses

    (a)Order of consideration. The Board may take up petitions or motions for decisions in any order, may grant, deny, or dismiss any petition or motion, and may enter any appropriate order. (b)Interlocutory decisions. A decision on a motion without a judgment is not final for the purposes of judicial review. If a decision is not a panel decision, the party may request that a panel rehear the decision. When rehearing a non-panel decision, a panel will review the decision for an abuse of discretion. A