“[B]ecause VLSI published the proposal to the board and the media and made allegations of fraud, extortion, and other false allegations, the public narrative has attempted to paint OpenSky as a party taking inappropriate actions…. The true inquiry should be into whether VLSI committed misconduct….” – OpenSky brief
Late last week, the parties to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Director Review of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) institution decisions in OpenSky Industries, LLC v. VLSI Technology LLC, IPR2021-01064 and Patent Quality Assurance, LLC v. VLSI Technology LLC, IPR2021-01229, filed their opening briefs. While OpenSky vehemently denied any abuse of the PTAB system, VLSI said the cases force the USPTO to answer the question “whether the Office should allow itself to be used to facilitate extortion.”
Vidal announced in June that she would sua sponte review the Institution Decisions in the two cases because they “[raise] novel issues of law and policy, as well as issues of particular importance to the Office and the patent community.” She then requested amicus briefing in the cases in July.
The petitioners involved in the two cases were incorporated after Intel was found to have infringed VLSI’s patents in district court and have no discernable business operations beyond challenging VLSI’s patent claims. The two entities’ petitions were also nearly identical to inter partes review (IPR) petitions previously filed by Intel that had been...
"I will note that in 2024, troops were -- that was Joe Biden by the way, Joe Biden -- were deployed to polling locations in 15 states," Hegseth said April 29, 2026 before the House of Representati...