C.F.R. » Title 37 » CHAPTER I—UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE › SUBCHAPTER A—GENERAL › PART 42—TRIAL PRACTICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD › Subpart A—Trial Practice and Procedure

37 C.F.R. § 42.70

Oral argument

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Request for oral argument. A party may request oral argument on an issue raised in a paper at a time set by the Board. The request must be filed as a separate paper and must specify the issues to be argued.

(b) Demonstrative exhibits must be served at least seven business days before the oral argument and filed no later than the time of the oral argument.

[77 FR 48669, Aug. 14, 2012, as amended at 81 FR 18765, Apr. 1, 2016]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 2016–2019 · leading case: Synopsys, Inc. v. Mentor Graphics Corp., 814 F.3d 1309 (Fed. Cir. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Synopsys, Inc. v. Mentor Graphics Corp., 814 F.3d 1309 (Fed. Cir. 2016). · cites it 2× “37 C.F.R. § 42.70 . All of these various mechanisms allow the Board to issue a final decision based on a full record rather than just on the limited record in the initial peti- tion and the patent owner’s preliminary response.”
Sas Inst., Inc. v. Complementsoft, LLC., 825 F.3d 1341 (Fed. Cir. 2016). · cites it 2× “, petitioner or patent owner—“with the right to an oral hearing as part of the proceeding”); 37 C.F.R. § 42.70 (providing that “[a] party may request oral argument” before the Board).”
Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., 941 F.3d 1320 (Fed. Cir. 2019). “62 (a), and hear oral arguments, 37 C.F.R. § 42.70 . And at the close of review proceedings, the APJs issue final written decisions containing fact findings and legal conclusions, and ultimately deciding the patentability of the claims at issue.”
Dell Inc. v. Acceleron, LLC., 818 F.3d 1293 (Fed. Cir. 2016). “§ 316(a)(10) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.70 . During the oral argument, Dell continued to rely on, Hipp’s articulating door 262 and power supply mounting mechanisms 278 as , caddies, but it also added a new argument.”
Regents of the Univ. of Minn. v. Lsi Corp., 926 F.3d 1327 (Fed. Cir. 2019). “§ 316 (a)(10) ; 37 C.F.R. § 42.70 , "[t]he hearings are short, and live testimony is rarely allowed.”
Merck & Cie v. Gnosis S.P.A., 820 F.3d 432 (Fed. Cir. 2016). · cites it 2× “51 , and it hears oral argument, 37 C.F.R. § 42.70 . And where appeals from inter partes reexaminations were first made to the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences, 35 U.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.