Since the introduction of the new bifurcated scheme for director review, the Office has identified "changes in the law" as a potential reason an IPR might be referred for a decision rather than discretionarily denied, but has not issued any decisions actually relying on this factor—until now. Director Squires' decision in Top Glory Trading Group Inc. and DP Dream Pairs Inc. v. Cole Haan LLC, IPR2025-01395, Paper 18 (USPTO Jan. 12, 2026), designated as informative the [...]

The recent Inline Plastics v. Lacerta decision underscores a critical point for patent owners: failure to correctly identify all inventors can lead to a finding of inequitable conduct and render entire patents – or even entire patent families – unenforceable. Background Inline Plastics, a Connecticut-based manufacturer of tamper-evident food containers, faced a major setback involving its Safe-T-Fresh product line. These containers, protected by five U.S. patents, feature an innovative tear strip integrated into the hinge that signals [...]

We have written before about Amazon's APEX procedure and how it could help patent owners take down infringing products found for sale on Amazon. Amazon Patent Evaluation Express (APEX) – A Cost-Effective Alternative to Litigation | Harness IP. In this post we discuss how the APEX program can also be used to address instances of indirect infringement, where the Amazon seller causes the buyer to infringe a patent. Amazon's APEX Program In recent years, Amazon [...]