Challenges To Two More Intellectual Venture Patents, Among The Reexamination Requests Filed Week Of 2/21/11

Here is the latest installment of Reexamination Requests from Scott Daniels, of Reexamination Alert and Practice Center Contributor….

Last week Xilinx requested reexamination of one of the five patents that Intellectual Ventures has accused Xilinx and three other companies of infringing (here).  The same lawyer who filed that request for Xilinx has now requested reexamination of a second Intellectual Ventures patent – U.S. Patent No. 5,687,325 – from the same case, as well of a third Intellectual Ventures patent not in the case, U.S. Patent No. 6,252,527 (see ex parte Request Nos. (8) & (9)).  Since the requests are for ex parte, not inter partes, reexamination, the identity of the real party in interest need not be disclosed.

In August EVM Systems sued CordisBoston Scientific and Abbott for infringement of two patents related to stents having a “slotted memory metal tube,” U.S. Patent Nos. 6,780,175 and 7,037,321.  Last week, Cordis requested reexamination of the ‘175 patent and Abbott requested reexamination of the ‘321 patent (see inter partesreexamination Request No. (5) and ex parte Request No. (15)). Although inter partes reexamination was possible for both patents, lawyers for Abbott chose ex parte reexamination. The choice between ex parte and inter partes reexamination is sometimes complex and one addressed in a recent post (here). (more…)