Law Commons^™

Standing To Appeal At The Federal Circuit: Appellants, Appellees, And Intervenors, Matthew J. Dowd, Jonathan Stroud

Catholic University Law Review

The America Invents Act of 2011 created three administrative patent review regimes that have flooded the rechristened Patent Trial and Appeal Board with almost 7,000 new matters in just under five years. The flood of matters—primarily, inter partes reviews (IPRs)—has led to more than 1,000 appeals to the U.S. Court of Appeals for Federal Circuit from administrative proceedings, eclipsing any other forum of origin. With the flood of administrative appeals, questions of first instance on appellate standing have arisen, resulting in a handful of important panel decisions.

While the other regional Courts of Appeals have largely adopted legal tests, standards, …

The Porous Court-Agency Border In Patent Law, Saurabh Vishnubhakat

Faculty Scholarship

The progression toward reevaluating patent validity in the administrative, rather than judicial, setting became overtly substitutionary in the America Invents Act. No longer content to encourage court litigants to rely on Patent Office expertise for faster, cheaper, and more accurate validity decisions, Congress in the AIA took steps to force a choice. The result is an emergent border between court and agency power in the U.S. patent system. By design, the border is not absolute. Concurrent activity in both settings over the same dispute remains possible. What is troubling is the systematic weakening of this border by Patent Office encroachments …

Precedential Decisions At The Ptab: An Endangered Species?, Robert M. Yeh Ph.D

Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property

This Article describes the USPTO’s practice of designating certain opinions as precedential, informative, or representative and compares it to the practice of issuing precedential opinions at other agencies that conduct quasi-judicial proceedings. The Article explores the impact of these agency practices on stare decisis. It concludes that the USPTO should simplify its designation process, increase the number of precedential opinions, and by doing so improve consistency and predictability.

Ptab Precedential Decision: Putting The Hammer Down On Filing Serial Petitions?, Ashley N. Klein, Warren J. Thomas

Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property

Petitioners for inter partes review proceedings under the America Invents Act routinely file serial petitions to challenge a single patent. Patent owners have criticized such “follow-on” petitions as abusive. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s recent precedential opinion in General Plastic Industrial Co. v. Canon Kabushiki Kaisha, IPR2016-01357, Paper 19 (P.T.A.B. Sept. 6, 2017), lays out seven non-exhaustive factors to guide the Board’s consideration of such “follow-on” petitions. This Article summarizes the Board’s analysis of follow-on petitions prior to General Plastic, examines how General Plastic has affected petitioners’ success in having such petitions instituted, and suggests strategies for practitioners …

Are There Really Two Sides Of The Claim Construction Coin? The Application Of The Broadest Reasonable Interpretation At The Ptab, Paula Miller, Marianne Terrot, Stacy Lewis, Tom Irving

Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property

The USPTO has applied the broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) claim construction standard during prosecution, reexamination, and other office proceedings for decades. The Supreme Court affirmed in Cuozzo Speed Technologies Inc. that BRI is also the appropriate standard for unexpired claims in post-grant proceedings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). Leading up to Cuozzo, many parties speculated that the PTAB’s application of BRI might create confusion and result in inconsistent outcomes at the district court level. Notably, nothing in the America Invents Act establishes a standard of deference between PTAB and district court decisions. But so far, there has …

To Stay Or Not To Stay Pending Ipr? That Should Be A Simpler Question, Joel Sayres, Julie Wahlstrand

Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property

No abstract provided.

Without Clear Rules, Ptab Practices May Run Afoul Of The Apa, Arpita Bhattacharyya, Rachel L. Emsley

Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property

No abstract provided.

Master Of The Petition: Exploring The Tension Between The Ptab And Petitioners In Controlling The Scope Of Aia Trials, Raja N. Saliba, Grant Shackelford

Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property

No abstract provided.

The Proper Appellate Standard Of Review For Ptab Factual Findings Made Incidental To Claim Construction, A. David Brzozowski Ii

Catholic University Law Review

The America Invents Act (AIA) represents the most significant change to U.S. patent law since the 1952 Patent Act. Since its passage, the AIA has drawn wide support from the intellectual property community, primarily due to the new post-grant opposition proceedings the Act created.

However, certain aspects of the new system created by the AIA are controversial. Specifically, judges and practitioners alike debate which standard of review courts should apply to the factual findings made by the Patent Trial and Appeals Board (PTAB) during these opposition proceedings. While the Federal Circuit has reviewed all factual findings made at the Patent …