直 Japanese PDF Font
  • Our Professionals
  • Our Work
  • Our Insights
  • Offices
  • Firm
  • Careers
Finnegan
  • Articles & Books
    • Ad Law Buzz Blog
    • At the PTAB Blog
    • European IP Blog
    • Federal Circuit IP Blog
    • INCONTESTABLE® Blog
    • Prosecution First Blog
  • Events & Webinars
  • IP Updates
  • Podcasts
    • AI + Finnegan
    • AI + Copyright
    • AI + Patent
    • AI + Privacy
    • AI + Trade Secrets
    • AI + Trademark
  • Unified Patent Court (UPC) Hub

At the PTAB Blog

Federal Circuit PTAB Appeal Statistics for February and March 2024

May 14, 2024

Authored and Edited by Daniel F. Klodowski; Audrey J. Parker; Jason E. Stach; Elliot C. Cook

In both February and March, the Federal Circuit affirmed a similar percentage of appeals from PTAB post-grant proceedings. The Federal Circuit in February affirmed the PTAB on every issue in 7 cases (70%) and reversed or vacated every issue in 2 appeals (20%), including in two precedential opinions: Google LLC v. EcoFactor, Inc. (No. 22-1750) and Weber, Inc. v. Provisur Technologies, Inc. (No. 22-1751). The court issued a mixed outcome (in which at least one issue was affirmed and at least one issue was not) in 1 appeal (10%), and did not dismiss any appeals on substantive (e.g., non-settlement) grounds.

In March, the Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB on every issue in 9 cases (69.23%) on appeal from post-grant proceedings and issued 2 opinions (15.38%) in which every issue was reversed or vacated. The court issued 2 opinions (15.38%) with mixed outcomes, including in two precedential opinions: Pfizer Inc. v. Sanofi Pasteur Inc. (No. 19-1871) and Virtek Vision International ULC v. Assembly Guidance Systems, Inc. (No. 22-1998). The court did not dismiss any appeals on substantive grounds.

Through March 31, 2024, the Federal Circuit cumulatively decided 1,285 appeals from the PTAB in IPRs, CBMs, and PGRs.  While the vast majority of these appeals came from IPR proceedings, the number of PGR appeals has slowly increased over time.

In IPR appeals, the Federal Circuit has cumulatively affirmed the PTAB on every issue in 900 cases (74.34%) and reversed or vacated the PTAB on every issue in 151 cases (12.48%). A mixed outcome on appeal occurred in 121 cases (10%), and the court dismissed 38 IPR appeals (3.14%) without rendering a decision on the merits.   

In PGR appeals, the Federal Circuit cumulatively affirmed the PTAB on every issue in 15 cases (68.18%), issued a mixed outcome in 3 cases (13.64%), and reversed or vacated every issue in 4 cases (18.18%). No PGR appeals have been dismissed on substantive grounds.

Taken together, in decisions for IPR, CBM, and PGR appeals, the Federal Circuit affirmed every issue in 955 cases (74.32%), issued a mixed outcome in 128 cases (9.96%), reversed or vacated every issue in 160 cases (12.45%), and dismissed 42 cases (3.27%) on substantive grounds.

Of the 1,285 IPR, CBM, and PGR cumulative appeals that it has considered, the Federal Circuit issued Rule 36 affirmances in 546 cases (42.49%). The court issued written opinions, including affirmances, reversals, dismissals, and mixed decisions, in 739 cases (57.51%). The ratio of Rule 36 affirmances to written decisions has trended steadily downward over time.

Related Practices

Appeals, Issues, and Legal Strategy

Federal Circuit and Supreme Court Appeals

Patent Office Invalidation Proceedings

PTAB Invalidation Proceedings: IPR and PGR

Related Offices

Atlanta, GA

Washington, DC

Contacts

Daniel F. Klodowski
Partner
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4216
Email
Jason E. Stach
Partner
Atlanta, GA
+1 404 653 6428
Email
Elliot C. Cook
Partner
Reston, VA
+1 571 203 2738
Email

Copyright © 2024 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. One of our lawyers will be happy to discuss the possibility of representation with you. Additional disclaimer information.

Related Insights

Conference

4th Global Patent Litigation FORUM

October 29, 2026

Munich

Federal Circuit IP Blog

Federal Circuit Vacates and Remands Infringement and Damages Judgment After Erroneous Verdict Form and Eligibility Analysis

July 8, 2026

Federal Circuit IP Blog

“2” Does Not Provide Written Description Support for “1”: Federal Circuit Affirms District Court’s Invalidation of Patent

July 8, 2026

At the PTAB Blog

Federal Circuit PTAB Appeal Statistics for March–May 2026

July 2, 2026

Articles

EPR Academy, Part 4 of 6: Choosing Between EPR, IPR, PGR, and Reissue

July 1, 2026

Federal Circuit IP Blog

Federal Circuit Affirms Noninfringement Ruling in Hatch-Waxman Litigation Based on Claim Construction, Prosecution History Estoppel, and the Disclosure-Dedication Rule

June 26, 2026

Federal Circuit IP Blog

Redesigns Done Right at the ITC: Federal Circuit Affirms ITC Determination of Noninfringement of Redesigned Products

June 26, 2026

Federal Circuit IP Blog

Federal Circuit Holds Defend Trade Secrets Act Claim Untimely Filed

June 22, 2026

Articles

The SECURE Data Act: A Federal Privacy Framework Moves Forward

June 16, 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