Continuing Legal Education (CLE)

AIPLA CLE Webinar: Patent Infringement & The PTAB: The Emergence of a Bifurcated System?

April 18, 2019 12:30 PM to 2:00 PM (Eastern Daylight Time)


1.5 CLE Credits


Fee: $95.00 and Up

Register Now

AIA Trial Proceedings were designed by Congress to provide an alternative route to challenging patent validity.  Now, with the alignment of the courts and Patent Trial & Appeal Board (PTAB) on critical matters of claim construction, and with the Board's expedited schedule outpacing all but the most aggressive of district court dockets, the PTAB is providing a new alternative — a potential path away from Markman determinations.  Given the additional potential for simplification of district court issues, the PTAB is positioned to become the first phase of a new bifurcated system of sorts.  That is, the first-in-time claim construction may begin to drive the critical issue of claim construction in patent litigation.

  • Given these new dynamics, the webinar will explore the overlap of issues and the resulting change to the patent litigation landscape:
  • The potential for increased stays give the Phillips switch and post-SAS Institute
  • The applicability of collateral estoppel across for a on matters of claim construction
  • Impact of PTAB claim constructions on parallel Markman determinations, and the use of Markman Orders at the PTAB
  • Strategies for approaching PTAB petition practice under Phillips
  • Patent Owner strategies for managing the alignment of standards across fora
  • Use of PTAB fact-finding in summary determinations
Presented by: Scott McKeown of Ropes & Gray LLP and Bridget Smith of Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear LLP


AIPLA Member Rate

General/Non-Member Rate

Single Site (1 Attendee)



2-10 Attendees per Site
All attendees must participate at the same location.



11-20 Attendees per Site
All attendees must participate at the same location.



21+ Attendees per Site
All attendees must participate at the same location.




Registration includes:

  • For multiple-attendee sites, all participants must attend at the same location.
  • CLE certification/processing for applicable states.  Reference CLE Information below for complete details.  
  • Webinar materials, including complete CLE processing information, accessible 24-48 hours before webinar date.

Cancellation Policy:

To get full refund, registrant must request refund five (5) days prior to live event. If less than five (5) days, registrant is transferred to product.

System requirements: 

Webinar access is compatible with any Windows 7 or later computer, Android OS devices, or Apple/iOS devices.  Check system compatibility here.

Accessibility for hearing impaired:

AIPLA’s webinars are available and accessible to individuals who are hearing impaired. If anyone at your location would like to know more about accommodations, please contact We ask that you let us know at least 7 business days out from the webinar, to ensure that we can identify and deploy the solution that best fits our registrants needs.


AIPLA has sought CLE accredidation* in the following states for credit(s): 

*CLE accredidations updated upon receipt.










New Jersey






New Mexico

Rhode Island

West Virginia




New York

South Carolina





North Carolina






North Dakota






Utah (self-study)







CLE Restrictions: 

ATTENTION attorneys in Louisiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Utah
These states mandate attorneys can only view a webinar independently at their own computer to receive CLE credit.  Multiple attendees prohibited.

ATTENTION attorneys in Arizona

Arizona does not certify courses or providers. Arizona lawyers are required to independently review AZ's regulations and make their own determination that it qualifies for credit towards their MCLE requirements. MCLE Regulation 104(A) identifies the standards to apply.  AIPLA will email an attendance affidavit to registrants requesting AZ CLE credit after the webinar.

ATTENTION attorneys in New Hampshire

New Hampshire attendees must self-determine whether a program is eligible for credit, and self-report their attendance according to NH Supreme Court Rule 53.  The New Hampshire Minimum Continuing Legal Education (NHMCLE) Board does not approve or accredit CLE activities for the NH Minimum CLE requirement.  AIPLA will email an attendance affidavit to registrants requesting NH CLE credit after the webinar.   

 Disclaimer:  AIPLA is a nonprofit national bar association.  The sole purpose of this CLE program is to provide educational and informational content.  AIPLA does not provide legal services or advice.  The opinions, views and other statements expressed by contributors to this CLE program are solely those of the contributors.  These opinions, views and statements of the contributors do not necessarily represent those of AIPLA and should not be construed as such.


  • McKeown_Scott-2 Scott A. McKeown

    Ropes & Gray LLP | Partner

    Scott McKeown is a partner in Ropes & Gray’s intellectual property litigation practice and chair of the firm’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) group. He focuses his practice on post-grant patent counseling and litigation matters at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and related appeals to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Scott handles all aspects of post-issuance patent proceedings, specializing in administrative trials before the PTAB, such as inter partes review (IPR) and post-grant review (PGR). He also provides advice on USPTO post-grant proceedings concurrent with complex International Trade Commission (ITC) and district court litigations.
  • Smith-Bridget-01-WEB 2015-08-01 Bridget A. Smith

    Knobbe Martens Olson & Bear LLP | Partner

    Bridget Smith is a registered patent attorney and partner in the firm's Irvine office. Bridget's practice focuses on patent protection and dispute resolution in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Having spent years working as a software engineer and data scientist, she now represents clients in a wide variety of technology areas, including semiconductors, computer hardware and software, business methods, and electronics, and advises clients on intellectual property issues in emerging technologies such as blockchain, smart contracts, and cryptocurrencies.
Add to:




  • Dog Invalidity Finding Affirmed for Dog Gene Patent

    August 16, 2019

    The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on August 9, 2019, held that the University of Bern, a Swiss university, could not claim sovereign immunity to stop a challenge to its patent related to the detection of a mutation in dog DNA.
  • Lawnmower Lawnmower Steering Patent Invalidation Reversed by Federal Circuit

    August 15, 2019

    The Federal Circuit on August 12, 2019, reversed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) invalidation of patent claims covering a lawnmower steering mechanism, holding that the Board’s decision was “predicated on its incorrect claim construction” of the term “mechanical control assembly.”
  • Networking Federal Circuit Rules for AT&T in Networking Patent Dispute

    August 13, 2019

    The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on August 12, 2019, affirmed a lower court’s ruling that AT&T Mobility LLC and Ericsson Inc. didn’t infringe Iridescent Networks Inc.’s networking patent.
  • Hylete Thumbnail Hylete Bid to Register ‘H’ Trademark for Athletic Apparel Fails

    August 7, 2019

    The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on August 1, 2019, held that Hylete, an athletic performance apparel company, could not undo the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board’s decision to reject its trademark application.
  • PTAB Precedential Decision PTAB Designates Two Decisions as Precedential

    August 6, 2019

    The US Patent and Trademark Office on August 2, 2019, designated two Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decisions as precedential and another as informative.