直 Japanese PDF Font
  • Our Professionals
  • Our Work
  • Our Insights
  • Offices
  • Firm
  • Careers
Finnegan
  • News
  • Finnegan Facts
  • History
    • Finnegan VISION
    • Finnegan FORWARD
  • Pro Bono
  • Management
    • Pricing & Alternative Fee Arrangements
    • AFA Models We Offer
    • Contingency Fees
    • AI + KM

Commentary

Squires’ Latest PTAB Memo Seeks to Boost U.S. Manufacturing with New Discretionary Factors

March 18, 2026

Intellectual Asset Management (IAM)

The USPTO’s latest memo introduces additional discretionary factors when considering PTAB institution, particularly for American manufacturers. The memo directs the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to consider domestic manufacturing ties of both accused products and patent owner products, as well as whether a petitioner qualifies as a small business. 

While the memo reflects broader government efforts to strengthen U.S. industry, attorneys interviewed by IAM questioned whether the patent system is the right mechanism for achieving trade related goals. Many noted that the new factors resemble the International Trade Commission’s domestic industry requirement, but may be far more difficult to apply within the PTAB’s procedural constraints. Finnegan attorney Forrest Jones offered his insight  on the practical challenges the memo creates for litigants navigating PTAB proceedings. 

Forrest emphasized  the challenge  associated with trying to implement an ITC domestic industry style requirement at the PTAB. “You potentially end up having hundreds of pages to analyze exactly what investments are related to the patents, what is related to what is going on in the U.S. versus what is going on with the patent owner outside the U.S. This is asking you to do domestic industry in both directions in 20 pages. If you have all of the evidence, that seems challenging to handle when you're also considering all the other discretionary denial factors like examiner error or the status of a parallel litigation that you're putting in a brief.” 

Forrest also highlighted the difficulty of applying manufacturing based considerations to certain technologies, such as software related inventions. “For something where your patented method is on a computer and you're trying to identify the manufacturing for the computers that it can be operated on, that seems like a difficult task.” 

Read Squires’ Latest PTAB Memo Seeks to Boost US Manufacturing with New Discretionary Factors 

Related Practices

Global IP Enforcement, Litigation, and Trials

Patent Litigation and Trials

Patent Office Invalidation Proceedings

PTAB Invalidation Proceedings: IPR and PGR

Related Industries

AI, Electronics, and Information Technology

Chemicals, Industrials, and Materials

Manufacturing

Related Offices

Washington, DC

Related Professionals

Forrest A. Jones
Partner
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4019
Email

Related News

Commentary

Finnegan Taps Partner from Kirkland to Boost IP Team

June 12, 2026

Commentary

New Appellate Opinion in Amazon Biometric Data Case May Signal ‘Narrowing’ Scope of BIPA Litigation, Experts Say

May 20, 2026

Press Release

Pvtech Secures Stay of New Jersey District Court Litigation Following USPTO Institution of All 10 Ex Parte Reexamination Requests Against Patents Asserted by Jiaxing Super Lighting

April 28, 2026

Commentary

Patent Cases Down 64% YOY at PTAB, up 70% at ITC in Q1 2026

April 15, 2026

Commentary

New USPTO Guidance on Design Patents for Computer-Generated Images Sparks Debate

March 18, 2026

Commentary

USPTO Has Eye on New Tech in Design Patent Guidance

March 17, 2026

Commentary

1988 Privacy Law, New Tracking Tech: Supreme Court Steps In

March 4, 2026

Commentary

Squires Sinks 2 PTAB Challenges, Including 1 He Instituted

February 20, 2026

Commentary

Valve's Anti-Troll Law Win Could Open New Doors

February 20, 2026

Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.

  • Privacy
  • Disclaimer
  • Legal Notices
  • Fraud Alert
  • EEO Statement
  • Cookies
  • Contact Us

© 2026 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP