Updates on Director Summary Notices for Decisions on Institution

On November 20, 2025, Director Squires issued another notice of decisions on institution and amended his first two notices of decisions on institution. All three of these notices contain an updated format, compared to the first two notices, that provides the public with more information about the institution status of post-grant proceedings. Notably, unlike the first two notices that listed cases where institution was denied without specifying the basis of denial, the new notices separate cases into three categories: discretionary denials, cases being reviewed for merit and non-discretionary issue-based denials, and merits-based denials.  

Director Squires assumed the responsibility of issuing institution decisions on October 20, 2025. Additional details about this change may be found in our posts: The New Director Institution Process: USPTO Hour Webinar Provides Updates and First Decision is Released and Recent USPTO Announcements: Proposed Rules to Limit PTAB Challenges and New Institution Review Procedures. In the Director’s first October 31, 2025 summary notice, he stated “[p]ursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 314(a), institution of inter partes review is denied in the following proceedings . . . ,” listing thirteen IPR numbers without further details. The Director issued a similar summary notice on November 6, 2025, denying twenty-one IPR proceedings.

The notices of decisions on institution that published November 20, 2025, follow a similar list format but contain additional details that inform the public about the status of these cases. For example, the newest summary notice groups cases into three categories:

1. Cases that have been denied based on discretionary considerations;
   
   
2. Cases that have passed discretionary denial review and will be reviewed for merits and non-discretionary considerations; and
   
   
3. Cases that have been denied based on the merits. 

Similarly, the amended October 31, 2025 and amended November 6, 2025 summary notices specify that the originally denied cases were denied for discretionary considerations and add a list of cases that will be reviewed for merits and non-discretionary considerations.

The newest summary notice further includes an asterisk on two cases in which there will be written opinions. These opinions have yet to be issued, and it is unknown whether they will come from the Director or a panel of APJs.