Intellectual Property Law
New Matter VOLUME 49, EDITION 4, FALL 2024
Content
- 2025 New Matter Author Submission Guidelines
- Contents
- Copyright Roundup
- Editorial Board
- Inside This Issue
- INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY SECTION Interest Group Representatives 2025-2026
- Letter from the Chair
- Letter from the Editor-in-Chief
- MCLE Self-Study Article
- Ninth Circuit Report
- Online Cle For Participatory Credit
- Prosecution Laches: Sonos, Inc. v. Google LLC; Netlist, Inc. V. Micron Tech., Inc.; and Wirtgen Am., Inc. v. Caterpillar, Inc.
- Quarterly International IP Law Update
- The California Lawyers Association Intellectual Property Alumni
- The Licensing Corner
- The Patent Eligibility Eras Tour: AI's Version
- TTAB Decisions and Developments
- Federal Circuit Report
Federal Circuit Report
NAVEED HASAN
Reichman Jorgensen Lehman & Feldberg LLP
THIS ARTICLE DISCUSSES THE Federal Circuit’s precedential decision in Platinum Optics Tech. Inc. v. Viavi Sols. Inc.1 as to the issues related to Article III standing in the Federal Circuit stemming from an Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceeding.2 In Platinum, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) dismissed Platinum Optics Technology Inc. ("PTOT")’s appeal of a final written decision in an IPR against Viavi Sols. Inc. ("Viavi") due to lack of standing.3 Although this case is related to Article III standing, it also relates to IPR estoppel and risk of future patent infringement suits. This article addresses the court’s analysis and its impact on such issues.
THE COURT’S ANALYSIS
Background