September 22, 2021
Authored and Edited by Y. Leon Lin; Sydney R. Kestle; Elizabeth D. Ferrill
In In re: MaxPower Semiconductor, Inc., No. 2021-146 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 8, 2021), the Federal Circuit denied MaxPower’s petition for mandamus seeking review of four PTAB decisions to institute IPR proceedings despite an agreement to first arbitrate patent validity.
MaxPower petitioned for mandamus review of the PTAB’s decisions to institute four IPR proceedings, arguing its agreement to arbitrate patent validity foreclosed PTAB review. A panel majority denied MaxPower’s petition. It first reasoned MaxPower had not established jurisdiction under the collateral order doctrine: “If MaxPower is truly not raising matters that are absolutely barred from appellate review under [35 U.S.C. §] 314(d) . . . , then MaxPower can meaningfully raise its arbitration-related challenged after the [PTAB]’s final written decisions.” The majority then rejected MaxPower’s argument that its appeals were authorized under 9 U.S.C. § 16(a)(1), which provides for appeals from certain arbitration-related orders. The Court found the PTAB’s decisions did not fall within any of the express statutory categories. Finally, the majority found MaxPower failed to show its mandamus petition was more than a means to avoid the statutory prohibition on appellate review of agency institution decisions. It noted MaxPower failed to show the PTAB clearly exceeded its authority because (i) the PTAB is not bound by a private contract between parties; and (ii) MaxPower failed to show how 35 U.S.C. § 294 deprives the PTAB of the authority to institute a review “when the statute does not by its terms task the agency with enforcing private arbitration agreements.”
Judge O’Malley dissented-in-part, finding the majority’s denial of a writ of mandamus in this case allows the PTAB to “add a new caveat to Congress’s clear instruction that agreements to arbitrate patent validity shall be ‘valid, irrevocable, and enforceable’—i.e., except during inter partes review.” In her view, 35 U.S.C. § 294 prevents PTAB review, at least until an arbitrator has determined the issue is not one for arbitration. And MaxPower has no other adequate method of obtaining relief because interlocutory appeals from institution decisions are barred under 35 U.S.C. § 314, and mandamus relief is “the only way to prevent the reviews from proceeding.”
Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC), validity
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.
June 10-12, 2024
San Francisco
Lecture
Patent Protection for Software-Related Inventions in Europe and the USA Training Course
June 5, 2024
Hybrid
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.