On November 27, 2017, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case that will determine the constitutionality of inter partes review, a proceeding before the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeals Board that allows third parties, including alleged infringers, to challenge the validity of issued patents. As previously reported by
Ryan J. Stephenson
US: Supreme Court hears argument on constitutionality of inter partes review
US: IPR institution denied for redundancy – Neither appealable nor grounds for estoppel
Parties that regularly submit inter partes review (IPR) and other post-grant petitions with multiple, potentially redundant grounds for review now have clearer guidance on (1) whether the institution of those petitions can be reviewed; and (2) whether estoppel applies to rejected grounds for review. In the recent Automated Creel Systems v. Shaw Industries decision, the
USPTO Considering New Rules for Post-Grant Proceedings
On August 20, 2015, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”) published proposed amendments to the “Rules of Practice for Trials before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board” for IPR, CBM, and PGR proceedings. The proposed rule changes include: adopting the claim construction standard used in district courts and set forth in Phillips v. AWH