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

Inter Partes Reexamination May Proceed Even If The Requester Has a Change-of-Heart

May 18, 2017

Authored and Edited by Jeffrey D. Smyth; Sydney R. Kestle; Elizabeth D. Ferrill

In In re AT&T Intellectual Property II, LP, No. 16-1830 (Fed. Cir. May 10, 2017), the Federal Circuit held that the Board did not exceed its statutory authority when instituting an inter partes reexamination because a request and a requester were present at the time of institution.

In 2012, LG filed a request for inter partes reexamination of AT&T’s patent related to compressing and transmitting video data. Before the Board could decide whether to institute, LG sought to have its request denied. Importantly, LG did not withdraw its request or withdraw from the proceeding. Rather, LG filed a request to suspend the standard rule that prohibits a requester from filing additional documents pre-institution. The Board denied LG’s request to suspend the rule, and ultimately granted LG’s initial request for reexamination. LG withdrew from the proceeding several months later.

On appeal, AT&T argued that the Board exceeded its authority by instituting reexamination after LG sought to have its request denied. The Federal Circuit disagreed. The Court first noted that its authority to review Board decisions relating to the institution of reexaminations is limited by 35 U.S.C. § 312(c) (effective September 16, 2011),* but that the provision did not apply here. The Court indicated that it could review whether the Board lacked the authority to institute reexamination due to the alleged lack of a request and/or requester because the question did not pertain to whether “the information presented in the request shows that there is a reasonable likelihood that the requester would prevail.” The Court then held that the Board properly acted within its statutory authority because, at the time of institution, a request and a requester (LG) were still involved in the proceeding—it was not until after institution that LG withdrew. The Court declined to further assess the propriety of the decision whether to institute.

The Court also affirmed the Board’s finding that AT&T’s patent was anticipated.

* In September 2011, Congress enacted the America Invents Act, which amended the procedures for inter partes reexamination and created the procedures for inter partes review. Inter partes reexamination procedures are being phased out.

Contacts

Jeffrey D. Smyth
Partner
Palo Alto, CA
+1 650 849 6618
Email
Sydney R. Kestle
Partner
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4241
Email
Elizabeth D. Ferrill
Partner
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4445
Email

Copyright © 2017 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

Conference

IAM Live: Navigating the UPC 2026

November 3, 2026

Paris

Conference

2026 AIPLA Annual Meeting

October 29-31, 2026

Washington, DC

Conference

31st Annual UMass Chan Research Retreat

October 14-15, 2026

Worcester

Conference

2026 IPO Annual Meeting

September 27-29, 2026

Toronto

Seminar

IAM and WTR Live: Australasia IP Forum 2026

August 11, 2026

Melbourne

Conference

13th Annual Summit for Women Leaders in Life Sciences Law

July 29-30, 2026

Boston

Webinar

Successful Strategies to Win Alice Motions and Fee Awards in Patent Cases Against Non-Practicing Entities

July 22, 2026

Webinar

Webinar

Early Motions in Trade Secret Litigation – Offensive and Defensive Insights

July 15, 2026

Webinar

Federal Circuit IP Blog

Federal Circuit Vacates and Remands Infringement and Damages Judgment After Erroneous Verdict Form and Eligibility Analysis

July 8, 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