September 29, 2014
Authored and Edited by Anthony A. Hartmann
In RPX Corp. v. VirnetX Inc., IPR2014-00171 (Paper 62, September 9, 2014), the PTAB denied RPX’s motion to expunge from the permanent record all documents that had been filed under seal in the proceeding.
Under Rule 42.54, the Board allowed RPX to file sealed exhibits and redacted copies of transcripts, papers, and decisions alleged to contain confidential information, i.e., “trade secret or other confidential research, development, or commercial information” as defined in 37 C.F.R. § 42.2.
Rule 42.54 allows confidential information to be sealed during the proceeding upon a showing of “good cause.” Rule 42.56 allows a party to move to expunge confidential information from the record “[a]fter denial of a petition to institute a trial or after final judgment in a trial.”
RPX argued that since the “good cause” requirement had been met to seal the exhibits and other papers, a motion to expunge all information previously deemed confidential should be granted. The Board disagreed and held that “RPX must show that any information sought to be expunged constitutes confidential information, and that RPX’s interest in expunging it outweighs the public’s interest in maintaining a complete and understandable file history of this inter partes review.” The Board acknowledged that sealing of the confidential information “for a limited time” during the proceeding was warranted under a balancing of the public’s interest in maintaining a complete and understandable file history and the parties’ interest in protecting truly sensitive information. But a motion to expunge must be considered “from the perspective of creating a final, permanent, public record.” The Board found that “[e]xpunging all previously sealed information, and retaining the previously redacted versions in their place, would result in less than ‘a complete and understandable file history’ and result in an overly inclusive expungement of information that RPX does not show is ‘truly sensitive.’”
The PTAB granted RPX’s alternative motion to expunge confidential information not relied upon in the Decision Denying Institution, finding that the information was “not required for a complete understanding of the record.”
This decision highlights that parties must be vigilant when protecting confidential information. Had RPX not provided an alternative position, the PTAB may have simply denied the motion and all of the confidential information may have become public 45 days after the Decision Denying Institution. Office Patent Trial Practice Guide, 77 Fed. Reg. 48756, 48761 (Aug. 14, 2012).
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.
Lecture
Patent Protection for Software-Related Inventions in Europe and the USA Training Course
June 5, 2024
Hybrid
10th Annual Georgia Asian Pacific American Bar Association Gala
May 29, 2024
Atlanta
Webinar
Obviousness of Biologics Inventions: Strategies for Biologics Claims in the U.S., Europe, and China
May 28,2024
Webinar
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.