Preliminary Agenda — Subject to Conﬁrmation/Revision (Any USPTO participants are Invited, and not yet conﬁrmed)
|Tuesday, March 10|
|1:00 pm – 3:45 pm||Pre-Conference Session: Half-Day “PTAB Bootcamp”
The bootcamp has become a staple of the conference, and will receive a refresh this year based on recent developments at the PTAB. As in years past, this session is geared toward lawyers who are interested in an overview of the who, what, and when of IPRs, PGRs, CBM reviews, and appeals. The “who” will address the general questions that need to be addressed to see if your client is eligible to file one of these proceedings. The “what” will address the general questions about what patents are eligible for each type of review and what may be raised in each of these proceedings. And the “when” will address the timing limitations for each of these proceedings. This interactive workshop will guide attendees through an IPR fact pattern from institution to final written decision, discussing best practices for petition drafting, briefing before the Board, discovery parameters boundaries, and tips for a successful oral argument.
|1:00 pm – 3:45 pm||Pre-Conference Session: Half-Day “PTAB Master Class”
The PTAB Master Class is for highly experienced PTAB trial practitioners. The session will include an interactive discussion of advanced topics that have developed over the past year.
|4:00 pm – 5:00 pm||Pre-Conference Session: Claim Amendments in EPO Opposition Proceedings: A Comparitive Analysis to Claim Amendments at the PTAB
This session will explore claim amendments in EPO opposition proceedings, including their similarities and differences with claim amendments at the PTAB.
|Wednesday, March 11|
|TBD||Registration & Breakfast|
|8:30 am – 9:00 am||Welcome & Keynote|
|9:00 am – 10:00 am||General Session 1: Administrative Law: The PTAB’s Use of Precedential Decisions Instead of Formal Rulemaking and Other Issues
After nearly eight years of practice, the PTAB has grown into a well-established administrative body. This session will explore key issues underpinning this growth and how these issues fair when examined from an administrative law perspective. Among other things, this session will explore the PTAB’s growing designation of precedential decisions (in lieu of formal rulemaking) and its increasing reliance on discretionary denials.
|10:00 am – 10:15||Refreshment Break|
|10:15 am – 11:15 am||General Session 2: PTAB Judges’ Panel – An Inside Perspective on Disclaimers, Estoppel, and Discretionary Denials
This session will feature first-hand insights from Administrative Patent Judges with experience presiding over PTAB trials. There will be a special focus on cutting edge topics such as disclaimers, estoppel, and discretionary denials.
|11:15 am- 12:15 pm||General Session 3: IPR Timing Issues in View of Recent Developments: the Shift to Phillips, Recent Developments at the Federal Circuit, and the Supreme Court’s Consideration of Click-to-Call
This session will explore how recent changes in practice at the PTAB implicate IPR timing considerations. Among other things, the PTAB’s shift to Phillips (and related increased necessity to align claim construction positions with district court), recent developments in RPI/privity/315(b) law, and the Supreme Court’s consideration of Click-to-Call will be explored.
|12:15 pm – 1:30 pm||Networking Lunch & Association Business Meeting|
|1:30 pm – 2:15 pm||Concurrent Session 1A: Claim Amendments Under the PTAB Pilot Program
This session will provide a primer on the PTAB’s pilot program for claim amendments. The session will explore actual examples, and compare results to claim amendments under the old system.
|1:30 pm – 2:15 pm||Concurrent Session 1B: Economic Analysis of PTAB Proceedings
This session will explore the impact PTAB proceedings have had on the economics of litigation. Big picture issues such as the impact PTAB proceedings have had on the cost and results of litigation will be examined. This session will also explore the ways in which PTAB proceedings are considered by people in various industries, such as tech-focused and bio-focused companies, including when evaluating deals, licensing, and other issues.
|2:20 pm – 3:05 pm||Concurrent Session 2A: The Nature of Discovery at the PTAB and How It Has Evolved
This session will explore the evolution of discovery at the PTAB, including practical considerations based on where things stands today. Successful ways to leverage the PTAB’s discovery process in view of the current state of the law will be closely examined.
|2:20 pm – 3:05 pm||Concurrent Session 2B: A Look Back – Analysis of Trends Over the Years
This session will provide a data-driven discussion of trends relating to PTAB practice, including changes in institution rates and final decision rulings; district court stays; and Federal Circuit affirmance/vacatur/reversal rates. Insights into the reasons for certain trends, and related key takeaways, will be closely examined.
|3:05 pm – 3:30 pm||Refreshment & Networking Break|
|3:30 pm – 4:15 pm||General Session 4: Hot Topics and Oral Argument Practicum
This high energy program will feature short mock arguments on current hot topics in PTAB practice.
|4:15 pm – 5:00 pm||General Session 5: Discussion with Director Iancu
This session will feature a discussion with Director Iancu.
|Thursday, March 12|
|9:00 am – 10:00 am||General Session 6: Appellate Issues
This session will explore various PTAB-specific appellate issues, including critical points such as appellate standing and issue reviewability.
|10:00 am – 10:45 am||General Session 7: View from the Federal Circuit
A perennial favorite, this session will invite a panel of Federal Circuit judges to share their view of the PTAB practice and tips for how patent owners and petitioners can improve their odds for success on appeal.
|10:45 am – 11:00 am||Break|
|11:00 am – 12:00 pm||General Session 8: Ethics Before the PTAB
This interactive session will explore emerging ethical issues at the PTAB from an APJ perspective, including ethical issues that come into play when inconsistent positions are taken in concurrent litigation.