May 06, 2014
Authored and Edited by Megan Leinen Johns; Anthony C. Tridico, Ph.D.
Are Board decisions denying or instituting inter partes review appealable to the Federal Circuit? Issuing three precedential opinions on Thursday, April 24, 2014, the Federal Circuit addressed these two questions. Here’s what the Federal Circuit decided, and perhaps more importantly, what it did not.
What the Federal Circuit Decided:
A Board decision not to institute inter partes review is not appealable to the Federal Circuit. 35 U.S.C. § 314(d); St. Jude Medical, Cardiology Div., Inc. v. Volcano Corp., No. 2014-1183 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 24, 2014) (granting motion to dismiss appeal of Board decision not to institute review because counterclaim asserting infringement filed more than a year before petition); In re Dominion Dealer Solutions, LLC, No. 2014-109 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 24, 2014) (denying writ of mandamus asking Court to vacate Board decisions not to institute review).
A Board decision to institute will not be immediately reviewed by the Federal Circuit via a mandamus petition simply to relieve a party of the burden of going through the inter partes review. 35 U.S.C. § 314(d); In re Proctor & Gamble Co., No. 2014-121 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 24, 2014).
What the Federal Circuit Did Not Decide:
For Non-Instituted Inter Partes Reviews:
The Court did not decide whether 35 U.S.C. § 314(d)’s “broad language” precludes judicial review of Board decisions not to institute inter partes review in district courts or by any route. In re Dominion Dealer Solutions, No. 2014-109, slip op. at 3-4 (citing Dominion Dealer Solutions, LLC v. Lee, No. 3:13CV699 (E.D. Va. Apr. 18, 2014)).
For Instituted Inter Partes Reviews:
The Court did not decide whether the Board’s decision instituting review can be challenged later, if the Board reaches a decision and that decision is appealed under 35 U.S.C. § 319. In re Proctor & Gamble Co., No. 2014-121, slip. op. at 5.
Notably, the Court distinguished the Board’s institution decision (first step) from the Board’s “conduct” during review proceedings and patentability decision (second step). St. Jude Medical, No. 2014-1183, slip. op. at 4-6.
The door remains open, it seems, for parties to challenge on appeal both positions taken by the Board in decisions instituting review and actions taken by the Board during review. We have yet to find out how the Federal Circuit will treat, for example, challenges to Board practices concerning redundant grounds, additional discovery, and claim amendments.
The Court also left open the possibility that it would grant mandamus petitions under rare situations involving irremediable interim harm after the Board institutes review but before it issues a decision on the merits. See In re Proctor & Gamble Co., No. 2014-121, slip. op. at 5.
Copyright © 2014 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP.
DISCLAIMER: Although we wish to hear from you, information exchanged in this blog cannot and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not post any information that you consider to be personal or confidential. If you wish for Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP to consider representing you, in order to establish an attorney-client relationship you must first enter a written representation agreement with Finnegan. Contact us for additional information. Additional disclaimer information.
Conference
Best Practices in Intellectual Property– A Decade of Dedication to IP Excellence
April 8-9, 2024
Tel Aviv
IAPP Global Privacy Summit 2024
April 3-4, 2024
Washington
INCONTESTABLE® Blog
The Federal Circuit’s Heartfelt Affirmation of Everybody’s Right to Use “Everybody vs. Racism”
March 22, 2024
Federal Circuit IP Blog
March 21, 2024
Conference
2nd Annual Forum on IP, Funding and Tech Strategies for Novel Therapeutic Modalities
March 20, 2024
Boston
Ad Law Buzz Blog
“Banning” a Banned Ingredients Claim: NAD’s Application (and Expansion) of the FTC’s Green Guides
March 18, 2024
Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.
We use cookies on this website to provide you with the best user experience. By accepting cookies, you agree to our use of cookies. Please note that if you opt not to accept or if you disable cookies, the “Your Finnegan” feature on this website will be disabled as well. For more information on how we use cookies, please see our Privacy Policy.
Finnegan is thrilled to announce the launch of our new blog, Ad Law Buzz, devoted solely to breaking news, developments, trends, and analysis in advertising law.