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

Second Arthrex Petition Granted to Vacate PTAB Decision

December 3, 2021

Authored and Edited by Angeline L. Premraj; Shannon M. Patrick; Amanda K. Murphy, Ph.D.

Earlier this year, the Supreme Court held that the USPTO Director has the discretion to review decisions rendered by PTAB judges. United States v. Arthrex, 141 S. Ct. 1970 (2021). For the second time following that decision, the Acting USPTO Director has granted review of a Final Written Decision by the PTAB.

In Proppant Express Investments, LLC v. Oren Technologies, LLC, IPR2018-00733, Paper No. 94, Oren Technologies petitioned the Director for review of the PTAB’s final written decision determining that all claims of challenged U.S. Patent No. 9,440,785 are unpatentable as obvious in light of the prior art. Relying on Oren Techs., LLC v. Proppant Express Invs LLC, No. 2019-1778, 2021 WL 3120819 (Fed. Cir. 2021), in which the Federal Circuit found that the Board’s failure to address the evidence of commercial success amounted to legal error, Oren argued that the Board failed to properly weigh the objective evidence of nonobviousness. Id. at 7-8.

Persuaded by this argument, the Director granted review of the Board’s decision. Ultimately, the Director vacated and remanded the case to the Board to issue a new decision addressing Oren’s objective evidence of nonobviousness regarding the commercial success and industry praise relating to Oren’s marketed product embodying the claimed features.

Tags

Final Written Decision, non-obviousness, Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS), United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)

Related Practices

Appeals to the PTAB

Related Offices

Atlanta, GA

London

Contacts

Shannon M. Patrick
Associate
Atlanta, GA
+1 404 653 6558
Email
Amanda K. Murphy, Ph.D.
Partner
London
+44 (0)20 7864 2814
Email

Copyright © 2021 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

Charitable

Bridges From School to Work Gala 2026

June 22, 2026

Washington, DC

Charitable

Banding Together 2026

June 18, 2026

Washington, DC

Articles

Article_D.-Mass-Patent-Litigation-Update-October-2024

D. Mass. Patent Litigation Update: April 2026

June 1, 2026

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

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