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

IPR and CBM Statistics for Final Written Decisions Issued in July, August, and September 2020

November 3, 2020

Authored and Edited by Daniel F. Klodowski; Michael R. Galgano; Zachery D. Olah; Aaron L. Parker; Elliot C. Cook

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board issued 65 IPR and CBM Final Written Decisions in July, including decisions following remands from the Federal Circuit, cancelling 474 (53.44%) instituted claims while maintaining the patentability of 378 (42.62%) instituted claims.  Patent owners conceded 35 (3.95%) instituted claims through motions to amend or disclaimer in cases reaching a final decision.  For comparison, the cumulative average rate of instituted claims cancelled in IPR and CBM Final Written Decisions is about 73%.

On a per-case basis, no instituted or substitute claims survived in 37 (56.92%) decisions, all instituted claims survived in 17 (26.15%) decisions, and a mixed outcome occurred in 11 (16.92%) decisions.  A mixed outcome occurs where at least one instituted or substitute claim remains patentable, and at least one is cancelled, in a Final Written Decision. 

 

In August, the PTAB issued 48 IPR and CBM Final Written Decisions, including decisions following remands from the Federal Circuit.  The Board cancelled 564 (70.24%) instituted claims while maintaining the patentability of 239 (29.76%) instituted claims.  Patent owners did not concede any instituted claims through motions to amend or disclaimer in cases reaching a final decision. 

On a per-case basis, no instituted or substitute claims survived in 23 (47.92%) decisions, all instituted claims survived in 8 (16.67%) decisions, and a mixed outcome occurred in 17 (35.42%) decisions. 

In September, the PTAB issued 38 IPR and CBM Final Written Decisions, including decisions following remands from the Federal Circuit.  The Board cancelled 446 (71.13%) instituted claims while maintaining the patentability of 178 (28.39%) instituted claims.  Patent owners conceded 3 (0.48%) instituted claims through motions to amend or disclaimer in cases reaching a final decision. 

On a per-case basis, no instituted or substitute claims survived in 14 (36.84%) decisions, all instituted claims survived in 7 (18.42%) decisions, and a mixed outcome occurred in 17 (44.74%) decisions. 

The overall cumulative instituted claim survival rate, broken down by technology center, is as follows:

More detailed cumulative statistics on the Board’s IPR and CBM decisions, updated through September 30, 2020, are available here on the AIA Blog. 

Statistics regarding the outcome of appeals to the Federal Circuit are available here.

Numbers of final written decisions by technology center and instituted claim survival rates by technology center are available here. 

Various other PTAB metrics collected and generated by Finnegan are reserved for the use of Finnegan and its clients.  Stay tuned to the AIA Blog for the latest updates, analysis, and statistics on all aspects of PTAB and Federal Circuit practice.  Subscribe to the AIA Blog at the bottom of the page to receive notifications of new posts via email.

Tags

America Invents Act (AIA), AIA statistics, Final Written Decision, Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)

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

Reston, VA

Washington, DC

Contacts

Daniel F. Klodowski
Partner
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4216
Email
Aaron L. Parker
Partner
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4387
Email
Elliot C. Cook
Partner
Reston, VA
+1 571 203 2738
Email

Copyright © 2020 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

7th International Conference on Biofuels and Bioenergy

June 25-26, 2026

Edinburgh

Conference

17th Summit on Biosimilars & Innovator Biologics

June 2-3, 2026

New York

At the PTAB Blog

Consistency Is Key – USPTO Issues Three New Informative Decisions

May 29, 2026

At the PTAB Blog

Discretion All the Way Down: USPTO Uses a Discretionary IPR Denial to Justify a    
§ 325(d) EPR Denial

May 28, 2026

Articles

Colorado Replaces Landmark AI Act: An Overview of the New SB 26-189 Framework

May 26, 2026

At the PTAB Blog

IPR and PGR Statistics for Final Written Decisions Issued in March and April 2026

May 26, 2026

At the PTAB Blog

Claim Disclaimer Derails Instituted IPR in Freightcar America

May 26, 2026

At the PTAB Blog

Before the Holding, the Message: Director Squires Uses Magnolia Medical to Outline PTAB Discretionary Denial Policy Changes

May 20, 2026

Conference

19th Annual Forum on Pharma & Biotech Patent Litigation in Europe

May 19-20, 2026

Amsterdam

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