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

Special Report – PTAB IPR Stats Over Time for Q2 2019

August 13, 2019

Authored and Edited by Daniel F. Klodowski; David C. Seastrunk; Michael R. Galgano; Aaron L. Parker; Elliot C. Cook

This special report explores IPR claim survival rates and the volume of issued final written decisions issued cumulatively through Q2 (June 30) 2019.

On a per-month basis, the survival rate for instituted claims reaching final written decisions in IPRs has varied significantly.  The highest monthly claim survival rate was 53.75% in May 2017, and the lowest survival rate (disregarding the first few months of final decisions due to the low sample size and 0% survival rate) was 3.54% in August 2014.  The cumulative average survival rate reached a peak of 29.92% in July 2014 before eventually settling just above 25% (25.60% through June 2019).

On a quarterly basis, beginning in 2014, claim survival rates still varied considerably over time.  The maximum quarterly instituted claim survival rate was 35.41% in Q1 2017, followed by 32.74% in Q2 2018.  The minimum quarterly instituted claim survival rate (disregarding the 0% survival rate in Q4 2013) was 8.07% in Q1 2014, followed by 12.08% in Q3 2015.  The current cumulative average claim survival rate of 25.60% in Q3 2018 is the maximum across all quarters.

On an annual basis, variability was more muted.  Other than calendar year 2013, in which none of the three total instituted claims survived, the annual instituted claim survival rate peaked in 2017 at 31.47%.  This year (through June 30) is on track to be the second highest, with an instituted claim survival rate of 28.92%.  As noted above, the current cumulative average claim survival rate of 25.60% is the maximum across all years. 

The number of final written decisions issued each month has also varied widely over time.  The most decisions issued in March 2017 (75 decisions), followed by November 2016 and March 2018 (69 decisions each).  The PTAB issued no decisions in January 2014, and several relatively low-volume months followed.  A notable dip relative to the other months occurred after the March 2017 maximum in April 2017 (15 decisions).  The cumulative average number of decisions increased steadily over time until early 2017, and has since stabilized at just under 37 decisions per month.

We will return to publishing our standard monthly statistics next month.  In the meantime, detailed cumulative statistics on the Board’s IPR and CBM decisions, updated through June 1, 2019, 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), Final Written Decision, Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)

Related Practices

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 © 2019 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.

Related Insights

Charitable

Bridges From School to Work Gala 2026

June 22, 2026

Washington, DC

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

Webinar

Changes at the PTAB from Settled Expectations to Real Parties in Interest to Director Involvement

May 18, 2026

Webinar

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