Blue Coat's Petitions for IPR Challenges Against Finjan Patents Denied

Cyber Security Investing

Finjan Holdings, (NASDAQ:FNJN), a cybersecurity company, and its subsidiary Finjan, announced that on January 23, 2017, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) for the United States Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO) denied two Blue Coat Systems, petitions for Inter Partes Review (IPR) challenging the validity of Finjan’s US Patent Nos. 8,225,408 (Case IPR2016-01441) and …

Finjan Holdings, (NASDAQ:FNJN), a cybersecurity company, and its subsidiary Finjan, announced that on January 23, 2017, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) for the United States Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO) denied two Blue Coat Systems, petitions for Inter Partes Review (IPR) challenging the validity of Finjan’s US Patent Nos. 8,225,408 (Case IPR2016-01441) and 8,677,494 (IPR2016-01443). The PTAB noted that Blue Coat’s petitions represent the seventh filed against these Finjan Patents, listing eight factors in deciding whether to exercise discretion not to institute review and that “not all factors need to be present, and [it] need not give equal weight to each factor in reaching [its] decision.”
As quoted in the press release:

Nevertheless, the PTAB proceeded to find all eight factors present concerning Blue Coat’s petitions and denied both. Significantly, the PTAB considered the “harassing impact” of Blue Coat’s “piecemeal challenges [had] on [Finjan] in defending its patent[s].”
“We are encouraged by the PTAB’s comprehensive decisions denying both of Blue Coat’s petitions. The PTAB is spot on to recognize that piecemeal and serial challenges to Finjan’s patents — or any others’ valid patents — are not only harassing, but also contrary to ‘Congress’ intent in enacting the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act,'” commented Julie Mar-Spinola, CIPO of Finjan Holdings. “This is an instance where the USPTO truly met its objective to ‘take into account the interests of justice and fairness to both petitioners and patent owners where multiple proceedings involving the same patent claims are before the Office.'”

Click here for the full text release.

The Conversation (0)
×