I can report a PTAB Success for a patent owner. Usually, PTAB Trials are not beneficial for patent owners and result in patent invalidity.
As part of my expert witness services, I assisted Citrix in an IPR in an instituted proceeding for US Pat. No. 8,135,432. This IPR was as usual hard to complete and get the appropriate outcome was crucial for Citrix.
PTAB judges praised my report, and were persuaded by my arguments.:
We credit the testimony of Dr. Hernandez on step (a), as it explains in detail the deficiencies in Petitioner’s position and is consistent with the references’ disclosures discussed above. See Ex. 2004 ¶¶ 90–92, 95.
Based on the full record developed during trial and for the reasons explained above, we are not persuaded by Petitioner’s arguments that Craft and Duursma teach step (a) of claim 1. Petitioner has not proven, by a preponderance of the evidence, that claim 1 would have been obvious based on Craft and Duursma under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
Additionally, the judges also cited how a reference, “Craft” was not disclosing the patented invention as presented by petitioner.
Thus, Craft discloses a user entering a username and password as a request to log in to the system and be authenticated, rather than “a query . . . for information associated with a first application.” We agree with Dr. Hernandez that “[a]uthentication credentials alone are not a query for anything other than authentication and permission to access a system.” Ex. 2004 ¶ 96; see PO Resp. 62–63.
Another PTAB Success for my services and assistance to my clients.