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

Federal Circuit IP Blog

§ 314(d) Bar Does Not Defeat Federal Circuit’s Mandamus Jurisdiction

March 29, 2021

Authored and Edited by Zan Newkirk; Christina Ji-Hye Yang; Elizabeth D. Ferrill

In Mylan Laboratories Ltd. v. Janssen Pharmaceutica, N.V., No. 2021-1071 (March 12, 2021), the Federal Circuit granted Janssen’s motion to dismiss Mylan’s appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) denial of inter partes review (IPR) institution.

The Federal Circuit first addressed whether it had jurisdiction over Mylan’s direct appeal. The Federal Circuit concluded that PTAB decisions denying institution of IPR are not subject to review on direct appeal. While the Federal Circuit has exclusive jurisdiction over PTAB’s final decision in an IPR, it does not have such jurisdiction over PTAB’s institution decisions under §314(d). Therefore, Mylan could not directly appeal the PTAB’s decision denying institution of its IPR.

Then, the Federal Circuit addressed whether it had jurisdiction over Mylan’s request for mandamus. A federal court can issue writs of mandamus when necessary to protect its prospective jurisdiction. The Court noted that prospective jurisdiction is triggered when a party takes a preliminary step that might lead to appellate jurisdiction in the Federal Circuit. The preliminary step of an IPR is the filing of a petition, and the Court found jurisdiction over Mylan’s request for mandamus on the merits. Mylan’s request, however, was denied for failing to show a clear right to relief.

Tags

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), jurisdiction, 35 U.S.C. § 314(d)

For more information

  • Mylan Laboratories Ltd. v. Janssen Pharmaceutica N.V.

Related Practices

Federal Circuit and Supreme Court Appeals

Patent Office Invalidation Proceedings

PTAB Invalidation Proceedings: IPR and PGR

Related Industries

Life Sciences

Pharmaceutical

Related Offices

Washington, DC

Contacts

Zan Newkirk
Associate
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4107
Email
Christina Ji-Hye Yang
Partner
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4465
Email
Elizabeth D. Ferrill
Partner
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4445
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

Reception

2026 IPO Education Foundation Awards Dinner

December 15, 2026

Washington, DC

Webinar

Data and Market Exclusivity: An Update on China’s New Law and Comparisons to the US and Europe

November 19, 2026

Webinar

Lecture

2026 Donald R. Dunner Endowed Lecture

October 27, 2026

Washington, DC

Articles

EPR Academy, Part 5 of 6: Special Considerations for Third-Party Requesters

October 14, 2026

Articles

Who Is a “Consumer?” The Supreme Court Takes Up the Video Privacy Protection Act

October 12, 2026

INCONTESTABLE® Blog

Federal Court Orders Rebel Creamery to Redesign Packaging and Disgorge $23.8 Million in Van Leeuwen Trade Dress Case

October 7, 2026

Federal Circuit IP Blog

Federal Circuit Affirms PTAB Obviousness Finding in DRAM Data Path Patent

October 5, 2026

Federal Circuit IP Blog

Federal Circuit Distinguishes Patent Eligibility Among Different Communications Systems Claims

October 5, 2026

Federal Circuit IP Blog

Federal Circuit Affirms Written Description Support, Vacates Mooted Non-Obviousness Finding

October 5, 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