Eugene T. Perez

Eugene Perez has practiced in the intellectual property field since 2000, specializing in chemical, pharmaceutical and biotechnology patents. His experience includes prosecuting patent applications, including corresponding with clients and preparing replies to all USPTO correspondence such as Office Actions and Restriction Requirements, initiating and conducting inter partes reviews (IPR), reissue applications, ex parte and inter partes reexamination proceedings, conducting legal research and preparing freedom-to-operate, patentability, infringement and validity opinion letters. Mr. Perez has also argued before the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, as well as before the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board.

Mr. Perez serves as the editor for BSKB’s Post Grant Proceedings website, a site devoted to post-grant patent review procedures, including IPR, post-grant reviews, patent reexamination and reissue.

Articles & Presentations

• The Popularity of Inter Partes Review Trials at the USPTO PTAB: Who is Filing and Why, AIPPI Japan Journal, December 2016 (Vol. 61, No. 12)
• PTAB Trial Statistics, BSKB’s PostGrantProceedings.com
• Attacking a Patent at the PTO: Beware the Real Party in Interest, Corporate Counsel, January 25, 2016
• Post Therasense: Why Supplemental Examination is Less Attractive, World Intellectual Property Review, September/October 2015
• An Update of the AIA Proceedings and PTAB Trials – Preissuance Submissions, Supplemental Examination, Inter Partes Review, Post-Grant Review, and PGR of Covered Business Method Patents, AIPPI Japan Journal, July 2015 (Vol. 60, No. 7)
• Claim Construction During Inter Partes Review, BSKB’s PostGrantProceedings.com
• New Claim Construction in IPR and PGR, World Intellectual Property Review, May/June 2015
• Pitfalls in Post-Grant Trials, Managing IP Webinar, May 2015
• Pitfalls in the First Phase of Post Grant Proceedings, Managing IP Webinar, April 2015
• First PGR filed: LaRose Indus. v. Choon’s Design (PGR2014-00008), BSKB’s PostGrantProceedings.com
• Understanding and Prosecution Strategies for Complying with the USPTO Myriad Guidance, BSKB’s PostGrantProceedings.com
• “Alice Corporation v. CLS Bank: How Will the Supreme Court Decide?”, BSKB’s PostGrantProceedings.com
• Supreme Court Grants Cert in Alice Corporation v. CLS Bank, BSKB’s PostGrantProceedings.com
• Taking a Deposition in an IPR and PGR, BSKB’s PostGrantProceedings.com
• Trial Statistics from the Patent Trial & Appeal Board, BSKB’s PostGrantProceedings.com
• Strategies for Attacking a U.S. Patent or Application: A Summary of Existing and New AIA Proceedings, JPAA Journal, July 2013
• Options Open: Third Party Proceedings Under the AIA, World Intellectual Property Review, September/October 2013
• The Patent Trial and Appeal Board, BSKB’s PostGrantProceedings.com
• Some Early Statistics For Supplemental Examination, Law360, August 13, 2013
• Prior User Rights, BSKB’s PostGrantProceedings.com
• Lighting Ballast v. Philips Electronics: What Is the Proper Claim Construction Standard for CAFC Review?, BSKB’s PostGrantProceedings.com
• Flo Healthcare v. Kappos: Time for the Federal Circuit to Show its Hand, World Intellectual Property Review, March/April 2013
• Inter Partes Review and Limited Discovery: Garmin v. Cuozzo, BSKB’s PostGrantProceedings.com
• Basics of an Inter Partes Review Petition, BSKB’s PostGrantProceedings.com
• Certificate of Correction by a Third Party, BSKB’s PostGrantProceedings.com
• Hard Target: Who’s in Charge in Post-Grant Proceedings?, World Intellectual Property Review, September/October 2012
• Starting An AIA Post-Grant Proceeding, Law360, August 17, 2012
• Starting an AIA Post-Grant Proceeding: the Different Threshold Standards, BSKB’s PostGrantProceedings.com
• Who is the “Real Party in Interest” in an IPR or PGR?, BSKB’s PostGrantProceedings.com
• Defining “Privy”, BSKB’s PostGrantProceedings.com
• Supplemental Examination: A More Detailed Review of Procedure Including the USPTO Proposed Rules, BSKB’s PostGrantProceedings.com
• Reexamination, Reissue, Certificate of Correction and New America Invents Act Proceedings: Substantive and Strategic Overview, Presented at the PLI Post-Grant USPTO Proceedings 2012 – The New Patent Litigation Seminar, February 3, 2012
• The Many Possible Ways to Modify a Granted U.S. Patent

Speaking Engagements & Recognitions

• Speaking Engagement: Japan Intellectual Property Association (JIPA) F8 Course (Co-Chair), October 2016
• Speaking Engagement: WIPR Webinar, Obviousness in PTAB Trials for Chem/Pharma/Bio Patents, October 13, 2016
• Speaking Engagement: The Knowledge Group Webinar, USPTO’s Proposed Changes to AIA Post-Grant Amendment Proceedings: Preparing for the Big Shift, March 2016
• Speaking Engagement: Managing IP U.S. Patent Forum, Washington, D.C., March 2016
• Speaking Engagement: INFOPAT Japan, October 2015
• Speaking Engagement: The Knowledge Group Webinar, Post Grant Patent Opposition in Europe and the U.S., September 17, 2015
• Speaking Engagement: Managing IP Webinar, Pitfalls in Post Grant Trials, May 12, 2015
• Speaking Engagement: Managing IP Webinar, Pitfalls in the First Phase of Post Grant Proceedings, April 16, 2015
• Speaking Engagement: Managing IP U.S. Patent Forum, Washington, D.C., 2015
• Speaking Engagement: INFOPAT Japan, April 2015
• Speaking Engagement: PLI, Patent Law Institute, New York, 2014
• Speaking Engagement: Managing IP Patent Forum, Washington, D.C., 2014
• Representative Matter: CAFC Reverses USPTO Ruling on Leo Pharma Patent, August 2013
• Speaking Engagement: New AIA Rules to INFOPAT Group in Japan, 2013
• Speaking Engagement: Patent Law Changes to INFOPAT Group in Japan, May 2012
• Speaking Engagement: PLI Seminars, New York, 2012
• Speaking Engagement: U.S. Patent Law Changes, Tokyo, 2011