Category: Post-Grant Proceedings

Recent PTAB Decisions Further Illuminate Denial of Review Under 35 U.S.C. § 325(D)

Authors: Kevin J. Spinella
Editor: Aaron J. Capron

Recently, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) denied grounds in petitions under 35 U.S.C. § 325(d) because the prior art and arguments relied on in the petitions were substantially similar to those presented during prosecution of the patents at issue.

For example, in Kayak Software Corp. v. IBM Corp. CBM2016-0075, Paper 16 (Dec. 15, 2016), the PTAB declined to institute a covered business method (CBM) petition under § 325(d).

In their Petition, the Petitioners used the exact combination of references that had been applied by the USPTO Examiner. The Petitioners also introduced a new reference not previously cited during prosecution as an additional means to demonstrate the unpatentability of U.S. Patent No. 7,072,849. Continue reading

Tagged , , , , , , ,

En Banc Federal Circuit to Decide Reviewability of PTAB Time-Bar Decisions

Authors: James D. Stein
Editor: Jason E. Stach

The Federal Circuit has found that it may not review a PTAB determination that an IPR petition was timely-filed within 35 U.S.C. § 315(b)’s 1-year bar. Achates Reference Publishing Inc. v Apple Inc., 803 F.3d 652 (Fed. Cir. 2015). The law may soon change, as the Federal Circuit recently granted Wi-Fi One’s petition for rehearing en banc of its September decision that it may not review the PTAB’s finding that Broadcom’s IPR petitions were not time-barred. Wi-Fi One, LLC v. Broadcom Corp., Nos. 2015-1944, -1945, -1946 (Jan. 4, 2017). Continue reading

Tagged , , , , , , ,

PTAB: What to Expect on Remand

Authors: Anthony A. Hartmann
Editor: James D. Stein

Only a portion of Federal Circuit decisions on appeals from IPRs and CBMs have remanded the cases in full or in part to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”). These remanded cases have been working their way through the PTAB, leading to new final written decisions.

While there are rules and statutes governing the timing of the trial phase of a PTAB proceeding, there are no such rules governing the remand process. Thus, a review of the PTAB docket is needed to determine what a party can expect on remand. While the procedures used on remand can be panel-specific, there are some similarities. Continue reading

Tagged , , , ,