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 July and August 2022

September 30, 2022

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

In July, the Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB on every issue in 7 (70%) cases on appeal from post-grant proceedings, reversed or vacated the PTAB on every issue in 1 (10%) case, and issued a mixed outcome in 2 (20%) cases, which occurs when at least one issue is affirmed and at least one issue is vacated or reversed in an opinion. The Federal Circuit did not dismiss any appeals on the merits, which may occur, for example, when the Federal Circuit determines that it does not have jurisdiction to hear an appeal.

In August, the Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB on every issue in 6 (85.71%) cases and reversed or vacated the PTAB on every issue in 1 (14.29%) case. The Federal Circuit did not dismiss any appeals on the merits or issue any mixed outcomes.

Through August 31, 2022, the Federal Circuit cumulatively decided 1,069 appeals from the PTAB in IPRs, CBMs, and PGRs. While the vast majority of these appeals came from IPRs, the number of PGR appeals has slowly increased over time, partially offsetting a near total decline in the number of CBM appeals.

In IPR appeals, the Federal Circuit has cumulatively affirmed the PTAB on every issue in 733 (72.94%) cases, and reversed or vacated the PTAB on every issue in 132 (13.13%) cases. A mixed outcome on appeal occurred in 106 (10.55%) cumulative cases, and the court cumulatively dismissed 34 (3.38%) IPR appeals without rendering a decision on the merits. 

In CBM appeals, the Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB on every issue in 37 (74%) cases, reversed or vacated the PTAB on every issue in 5 (10%) cases, issued a mixed outcome in 4 (8%) cases, and dismissed 4 (8%) cases. These statistics are unchanged from our last report through June 30, 2022.

In PGR appeals, the Federal Circuit cumulatively affirmed the PTAB on every issue in 9 (64.29%) cases, issued a mixed outcome in 1 (7.14%) case, and reversed or vacated every issue in 4 (28.57%) cases. No PGR appeals have been dismissed on the merits.

Taken together, in decisions for IPR, CBM, and PGR appeals, the Federal Circuit affirmed every issue in 779 (72.87%) cases, issued a mixed outcome in 111 (10.38%) cases, reversed or vacated every issue in 141 (13.19%) cases, and dismissed 38 (3.55%) cases.

Of the 1,069 IPR, CBM, and PGR appeals it has considered thus far, the Federal Circuit issued Rule 36 affirmances in 460 (43.03%) cases. The court issued written opinions, including affirmances, reversals, dismissals, and mixed decisions, in 609 (56.97%) cases. The ratio of Rule 36 affirmances to issued decisions has trended downward over time.

Stay tuned to the At the PTAB Blog for the latest updates, analysis, and statistics on all aspects of PTAB and Federal Circuit practice. Subscribe to receive notifications of new posts via email.

Tags

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)

Related Practices

Federal Circuit and Supreme Court Appeals

Patent Office Invalidation Proceedings

PTAB Invalidation Proceedings: IPR and PGR

Related Offices

Atlanta, GA

Reston, VA

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 © 2022 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

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

July 8, 2026

Federal Circuit IP Blog

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

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

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 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

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