InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 1
Posts 92
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 10/08/2019

Re: None

Tuesday, 08/03/2021 8:53:52 PM

Tuesday, August 03, 2021 8:53:52 PM

Post# of 18410
The Yahoo's would calm down if they revisited ..
Www.wacopatentblog.com
5-16-2020 Entry (scroll down)
Posted here almost a year ago ...
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=157772509

The "Albright Doctrine"
First, to be clear, the naming of the "Albright Doctrine" is mine, and hopefully no one (especially Judge Albright or the WDTX) takes offense. What I am calling the Albright Doctrine is simply the idea that a federal court can get to trial more quickly than the PTAB can both institute and and adjudicate an inter partes review. Judge Albright has been outspoken about this issue, saying specifically that "t's my job to give people the opportunity to have their cases tried in a federal court ... and I probably can get a patent trial resolved more quickly than the PTAB can."


In allowing patent owners their day in court in a timely manner, Judge Albright has single-handedly changed the tenor of patent litigation and provided a fair and reasonable jurisdiction for patent disputes. Now, the PTAB is jumping on board!

As indicated below, the PTAB has basically stated that if the invalidity challenges are the same in the IPR request and parallel patent litigation, then if a court has a reasonable chance of adjudicating the issue first, the Board will use its discretion and not even institute a review. In essence, the PTAB is saying, "yes, we believe that courts can move more quickly than we can, and if the issues are the same, then any IPR would be moot and should not be instituted."

This is what I call the Albright Doctrine: that a district court can moot an IPR by moving quickly to trial so that a jury can adjudicate validity rather than the PTAB. I am a fan, because I agree with Judge Albright that juries are wise and will make the correct decisions through the longstanding U.S. trial system if allowed to do so. I am sure that infringers and those that do not respect patents would disagree."
Snip