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

Prosecution First Blog

How Does the USPTO Handle Concurrent Post-Issuance Proceedings On the Same Patent?

April 12, 2016

Authored and Edited by Justin N Mullen; Stephanie M. Sanders

During the PTAB Boardside Chat on April 5th, 2016, Judges Medley and Chang discussed the relationship between AIA post-grant proceedings, ex parte reexamination, and reissue applications. The Board provided the following chart that includes an overview of the differences between these three Patent Office procedures, which may assist a patentee’s selection of one over another.

Comparison of AIA Reexam and Reissue Proceedings 4.12.2016

***Click the above image to open a larger version of it in a new browser tab.

The full slide deck presented during this PTAB Boardside Chat provides additional information about how the Board responds when these three types of Office proceedings intersect on the same patent or related applications that are still pending. In particular, the Judges noted that there are some instances when the Board will allow an AIA trial to proceed concurrently with an ex parte reexamination or examination of a reissue application on the same patent. In other instances, the Board may stay one proceeding, terminate one (or more) proceedings, or join multiple proceedings.

Tags

America Invents Act (AIA), Boardside Chat, ex parte reexamination

Copyright © 2016 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

2026 EDTX Bench Bar Conference

October 28-30, 2026

Fort Worth

Conference

Georgia Life Sciences Summit 2026

August 25-26, 2026

Sandy Springs

Conference

7th International Conference on Biofuels and Bioenergy

June 25-26, 2026

Edinburgh

Conference

IPBC Global 2026

June 15-17, 2026

San Diego

Conference

17th Summit on Biosimilars & Innovator Biologics

June 2-3, 2026

New York

Articles

Article_D.-Mass-Patent-Litigation-Update-October-2024

D. Mass. Patent Litigation Update: April 2026

June 1, 2026

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

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