Fried Frank scored a significant victory on behalf Godo Kaisha IP Bridge on August 31, 2018, when the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) denied an “Inter Partes Review” petition that sought to invalidate one of IP Bridge's patents on microprocessor technology.
Inter Partes Review (IPR) is an administrative proceeding that allows the PTAB to review and cancel claims of already-issued patents. Since IPR proceedings were established in 2012, the PTAB has instituted review in nearly 70% of cases concerning computer technology.
In February 2018, Intel Corp. filed an IPR petition challenging IP Bridge's patent, US Patent No. 6,397,319 (the '319 patent). The '319 patent is directed to an innovative way of improving the performance of Very Long Instruction Word (VLIW) processors, such as those used for virtual reality applications and as embedded media processors in consumer electronic devices. Intel argued that the '319 patent is invalid because the claimed invention was disclosed in other patents filed before the '319 patent.
Earlier this year, Fried Frank filed a preliminary response opposing Intel's petition and highlighted the important differences between the '319 patent and the prior art relied upon by Intel. In a detailed opinion issued last week, the PTAB agreed, finding that Intel had failed to show a reasonable likelihood of prevailing with respect to any claim of the '319 patent. The PTAB thus refused to institute an IPR proceeding and the '319 patent remains valid.
The Fried Frank team was led by litigation partner Robert M. Masters and included litigation partner Jonathan R. DeFosse, litigation special counsel Timothy P. Cremen, and litigation associate Kevin A. Ryan.