Summary: Last year's decision in Facebook v Skky has become precedential and patent maximalists continue their effort to undermine PTAB, which generally stops a lot of patent trolls

IN April last year we wrote about this patent troll with USPTO-granted patents that had been used to blackmail some large companies.

As covered by Law 360 last year [1, 2]: (reference PDF)

An expanded Patent Trial and Appeal Board panel declined Thursday to adopt a "time of filing" rule that would change how judges evaluate whether a patent is eligible for covered business method review, instead leaving in place a decision not to review a media delivery patent Facebook Inc. is accused of infringing.

The expanded panel, which included Chief Judge David Ruschke, was ruling on a request for rehearing Facebook filed last year after it lost a challenge to a Skky LLC media delivery patent.

Michael Loney, Managing Editor of Managing IP, posted this reminder that large companies too rely on PTAB when getting rid of nuisance software patents and said that this decision is now precedential:

September 2017’s Facebook v Skky, explaining the determination of covered business method patent review eligibility, is the 11th AIA trial decision to be deemed precedential

Just before the holiday period, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) designated the Facebook v Skky decision from September 12 2017 as precedential.

Separately, Loney noted that in spite of fee hikes the number of petitions grew last year and hit an all-time record.

2017 *just* squeaked into a record year for total PTAB petitions filed, beating 2015 by two petitions! 2017: 1799 2016: 1758 2015: 1797 2014: 1677 2013: 790

Let's not take any of it for granted as more PTAB bashing is expected from the patent maximalists. It's all about destroying PTAB to Watchtroll. In his own words: "The issues I will be watching in 2018 other than Oil States are as follows: (1) What does the new Director of the USPTO do with respect to reforming the PTAB? (2) Will the USPTO adopt a code of judicial ethics for PTAB judges?"

Again insinuating that these judges are unethical? They always try to create a scandal where none existed. ⬆