IPWatchdog Unleashed

Gene Quinn

Each week we journey into the world of intellectual property to discuss the law, news, policy and politics of innovation, technology, and creativity.  With analysis and commentary from industry thought leaders and newsmakers from around the world, IPWatchdog Unleashed is hosted by world renowned patent attorney and founder of IPWatchdog.com, Gene Quinn.

  1. Reexamination vs. IPR: Which is Better for Patent Owners?

    12 HR AGO

    Reexamination vs. IPR: Which is Better for Patent Owners?

    Send a text This week on IPWatchdog Unleashed we discuss whether patent owners are better off facing post-grant challenges at the  Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) or the Central Reexamination Unit (CRU) at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). PTAB practitioners Matt Phillips and Kevin Greenleaf join host Gene Quinn for an examination of how patent owners and challengers should be strategically thinking about the shifting post-grant environment at the USPTO. The conversation highlights the growing reality that post-grant practice is no longer defined solely by inter partes review (IPR), but that ex parte reexamination has seen a resurgence in popularity, which requires careful evaluating timing, procedural dynamics, cost, and institutional realities.  While IPR proceedings offer structured timelines, litigation-style advocacy, and strict scrutiny of petitions as drafted, reexamination provides prosecution-style flexibility, examiner interviews, and opportunities to refine claims through amendment. The trio emphasized that the low threshold for ordering reexamination makes institution statistics less meaningful than what happens in the first Office action. At the same time, PTAB proceedings can end quickly if institution is denied, offering efficiency advantages that reexamination cannot always match. These tradeoffs mean that neither forum is universally superior; each presents strategic advantages depending on the strength of the prior art, litigation posture, and business objectives.  Ultimately, the discussion underscored that administrative patent review remains in a period of policy uncertainty. Changes in PTAB discretionary-denial practice, operational shifts within the CRU, and the absence of stable rulemaking create ongoing unpredictability for both patent owners and challengers. As post-grant challenges increasingly shift between forums, practitioners must focus on rigorous diligence, careful drafting, and adaptable strategy. The conclusion is that in today’s environment, success in post-grant proceedings depends less on forum preference and more on preparation, technical strength, and the ability to navigate a system still searching for long-term equilibrium. Visit us online at IPWatchdog.com. You can also visit our channels at YouTube, LinkedIn, X, Instagram and Facebook.

    50 min
  2. PTAB Whiplash and Uncertainty: Director Discretion and Policy Swings at the PTO

    9 FEB

    PTAB Whiplash and Uncertainty: Director Discretion and Policy Swings at the PTO

    Send us a text This week on IPWatchdog Unleashed Gene Quinn speaks with Todd Walters and the two explore the current state of Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) practice and the growing tension among stakeholders as policy changes continue to reshape post-grant proceedings. Both emphasized that the most striking development in recent PTAB discussions is the intensity of opinion from patent owners and petitioners alike, reflecting the high financial stakes and strategic importance of AIA proceedings.  A central theme of the discussion was the lack of predictability in PTAB practice, driven largely by shifts in USPTO leadership and the exercise of Director discretion in administering AIA trials. Walters noted that changes in policies governing discretionary denials, real-party-in-interest rules, and parallel litigation considerations have made it difficult for practitioners to provide durable strategic guidance. Quinn and Walters agreed that without greater stability, the system will continue to experience “pendulum swings,” with each administrative transition reshaping PTAB access and outcomes in ways that undermine confidence in the patent system.  The discussion also addressed broader structural issues in patent dispute resolution, including serial challenges to patents, the emerging concept of “settled expectations,” and the complexity created by parallel proceedings across the PTAB, district courts, the ITC, and the Federal Circuit. Both participants suggested that meaningful reform will require patent owners and petitioners to work together to develop a more predictable and balanced framework for post-grant review. While consensus may not satisfy stakeholders at the extremes, establishing clear and stable rules would strengthen confidence in the patent system and reduce the cycle of policy reversals that has defined PTAB practice in recent years. Visit us online at IPWatchdog.com. You can also visit our channels at YouTube, LinkedIn, X, Instagram and Facebook.

    54 min
  3. Inside the PTAB Reset: Reengineering the PTAB with Practical Fixes

    2 FEB

    Inside the PTAB Reset: Reengineering the PTAB with Practical Fixes

    Send us a text In this episode of IPWatchdog Unleashed, Gene Quinn and Matt Johnson, Co-Chair of the PTAB Practice at Jones Day, take an in-depth look at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) nearly a decade and a half after its launch. Quinn and Johnson explain the viewpoint that the PTAB drifted from what many had initially expected, pointing to among other things the lengthy, merits focused institution decisions and serial challenges that eroded confidence among patent owners and raised serious questions about whether the PTAB functioned as a balanced error-correction mechanism.  The conversation zeroes in on structural flaws that distort outcomes rather than improve patent quality. Quinn and Johnson discuss obviousness determinations built on excessive combinations of prior art, warning that such analyses blur the line between legitimate hindsight reconstruction and genuine innovation assessment. They also highlight a systemic blind spot: nuisance “ankle-biter” assertions that exploit litigation economics while largely evading PTAB scrutiny. These cases have driven much of the political backlash against patents while remaining functionally untouched by the post-grant review process, leaving operating companies to absorb the cost as a tax on doing business and legitimate patent owners to be vilified as if they are the problem. Johnson offers concrete, targeted reform suggestions that would lead to a better functioning PTAB and more streamlined IPR review system. Instead of abstract complaints, he proposes narrowing PGR estoppel to encourage early challenges, moving IPR estoppel to the point of institution to eliminate gamesmanship, separating institution decisions from full merits adjudication to reduce confirmation bias, and rethinking quiet-title concepts to better align notice to implementers with settled expectations of patent owners.  The takeaway is clear: the PTAB does not need to be dismantled—but it does need disciplined recalibration if it is to deliver fairness, predictability, and legitimacy going forward. Recorded January 31, mentions Squires, Kiley, Holcomb and Holte Visit us online at IPWatchdog.com. You can also visit our channels at YouTube, LinkedIn, X, Instagram and Facebook.

    55 min
  4. IP, Ingenuity and Entrepreneurship: Enabling Human Creativity, Innovation and Economic Mobility

    26 JAN

    IP, Ingenuity and Entrepreneurship: Enabling Human Creativity, Innovation and Economic Mobility

    Send us a text In this episode of IPWatchdog Unleashed, Gene Quinn speaks with Megan Carpenter following her decision to step down as Dean of UNH Franklin Pierce School of Law after more than eight years. Carpenter reflects on rebuilding the institution’s IP-focused identity, restoring alumni trust, increasing enrollment and driving engagement growth, while explaining why builders—such as herself—eventually need new challenges. The conversation quickly broadens into a candid assessment of the IP ecosystem. Quinn and Carpenter discuss intellectual property as the legal infrastructure that enables and supports human creativity, innovation, and economic mobility—but acknowledge that intellectual property suffers from a serious messaging and credibility gap largely because the compelling argument for strong IP requires a story and explanation, while the misguided “weak IP is best” movement can fit its narrative onto a bumper sticker. Both Quinn and Carpenter also agree that weak enforcement, efficient infringement, and diminished remedies have distorted incentives, pushing innovators toward litigation instead of productive licensing and collaboration. They also tackle emerging issues, including AI’s impact on legal practice and education. Both emphasize that AI is a powerful tool, not a replacement for human judgment, and warn that law schools and firms that fail to train lawyers in AI literacy and prompting skills are already falling behind. The discussion concludes with a clear takeaway: IP professionals occupy a privileged and strategic position. Strengthening IP systems, rebuilding public trust, and expanding opportunity—especially for smaller innovators and underrepresented communities—are not optional. They are essential to sustaining innovation in a rapidly evolving global economy. Recorded January 31, mentions Squires, Kiley, Holcomb and Holte Visit us online at IPWatchdog.com. You can also visit our channels at YouTube, LinkedIn, X, Instagram and Facebook.

    1h 3m
  5. Pioneering Innovations and Legacy: A Conversation with Inventor Gil Hyatt

    12 JAN

    Pioneering Innovations and Legacy: A Conversation with Inventor Gil Hyatt

    Send us a text This week on IPWatchdog Unleashed, Gene Quinn sits down with prolific inventor Gil Hyatt, exploring his innovative journey and aspirations to leave a lasting legacy. Gil, known for his significant contributions to the field of electrical engineering and microcomputers, shared insightful anecdotes about his early days, his pioneering work in artificial intelligence, and his ambitions to benefit future generations. Throughout the discussion, Gene and Gil tackled the controversies surrounding the perception of inventors like Hyatt as "patent trolls." Clarifying this mischaracterization, Hyatt explained that while his patents were widely licensed, he never instigated lawsuits for patent infringement—rather the lawsuits he was involved in often came from companies seeking invalidation for strategic advantage.  One of the key highlights of the conversation was Gil's creation of a non-profit AI Foundation, which is aimed at advancing AI technology and bolstering U.S. economic interests. This non-profit organization is set to hold Gil's substantial portfolio of AI patent applications, which cover his pioneering work dating back to the 1980s, and includes groundbreaking claims in artificial intelligence that could revolutionize sectors like education, manufacturing, and trade. Throughout the conversation Gil discusses the spirit of the American dream, and how the Foundation, operating in consultation with the Trump Administration, intends to leverage AI in support of trade negotiations, offering favorable licensing to U.S. companies while using patent rights to block foreign imports that violate the AI manufacturing process patents at the International Trade Commission. Recorded January 31, mentions Squires, Kiley, Holcomb and Holte Visit us online at IPWatchdog.com. You can also visit our channels at YouTube, LinkedIn, X, Instagram and Facebook.

    44 min
  6. 29/12/2025

    2025 in Focus: Voices, Ideas, and the Road Ahead

    Send a text In this episode of IPWatchdog Unleashed we take a stroll down memory lane to look back on some of the conversations we had with guests during 2025 that were for one reason or another moments that stood out. This is not a "best o 2025" per se, and the pieces of conversations we pull together were not always chosen because they dealt with hard hitting substantive IP issues, although some do.  We begin our journey through 2025 with our conversation with Judge John Holcomb, who is a federal district court judge for the Central District of California. Judge Holcomb was one of our keynote speakers at IPWatchdog LIVE 2025, where he and Gene had a fireside chat style conversation, which was our podcast episode for March 10, 2025. In the piece of our conversation selected Gene asked him about how he became a judge and specifically about how he got onto the radar of those advising the President who to nominate. Judge Holcomb also discusses his judicial philosophy, retelling the tale of three umpires chatting after a game. We also remember an emotional conversation with Sherry Knowles, a breast cancer survivor who talked with us about the journey of life saving drugs from lab to market. We talk with Henry Hadad about music, creativity and who is the greatest guitarist of all time. We cover what it means to be innovative with Patrick Kilbride, how intellectual property empowers with WIPO Director General Daren Tang, the shocking reasons why Americans pay more for pharmaceuticals with Corey Salsberg, the petitioner's perspective about what changes are being made to the PTAB with Scott McKeown, and the never ending fight against fakes, dupes and counterfeits with Gina Johnson.  Visit us online at IPWatchdog.com. You can also visit our channels at YouTube, LinkedIn, X, Instagram and Facebook.

    56 min

About

Each week we journey into the world of intellectual property to discuss the law, news, policy and politics of innovation, technology, and creativity.  With analysis and commentary from industry thought leaders and newsmakers from around the world, IPWatchdog Unleashed is hosted by world renowned patent attorney and founder of IPWatchdog.com, Gene Quinn.

You Might Also Like