直 Japanese PDF Font
  • 我们的专业人员
  • 服务
  • 我们的见解
  • 办公室
  • 事务所
  • 人才招聘
Finnegan
  • 新闻
  • 飞翰事实
  • History
    • Finnegan VISION
    • Finnegan FORWARD
  • 慈善性法律援助
  • 管理层
    • Pricing & Alternative Fee Arrangements
    • AFA Models We Offer
    • Contingency Fees
    • AI + KM

James R. Barney

PTAB Popularity on the Rise

March 25, 2015

Inside Counsel

Since the signing of the America Invents Act (AIA) in 2011, the most surprising aspect has been the overwhelming use of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). InsideCounsel interviewed Finnegan attorney Kathleen A. Daley to discuss which industries benefit from the PTAB, emerging industries that may be using the PTAB, the PTAB’s impact on future patent reform, and why the PTAB’s decisions have been in favor of patent challengers.

Daley believes that although all industries can benefit from PTAB proceedings, the electrical and computer technology industries have particularly benefited the most from post-grant proceedings at the PTAB. She says, “Given that a large percentage of district court litigation involves the electrical and computer technologies, it stands to reason that more companies in those areas have sought out the PTAB to decide patent validity.” Daley also notes that the companies that hold the majority of patents are in the electrical and computer industries and the defendants in those cases are advocates for a cheaper option to litigation. However, recently biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies have also been using post-grant proceedings.

According to Daley, the PTAB will have a significant impact on patent reform in the future. There is currently a patent reform bill that includes a change to the standard that the PTAB uses to construe claims. Daley says, “This bill would make the PTAB construe claims in post-grant proceeding using the same standard as in district court and would require the PTAB to consider any claim construction that a district court has already made. This would be amount to a rejection of the claim construction standard that the Federal Circuit announced for post-grant proceedings in its decision in In re Cuozzo.” Additionally, many believe that the current standard that the Patent and Trademark Office has in place for amending claims in inter partes review proceedings is too strict. As a result, Congress has been asked to step in which will hopefully lead to improvements in the process.

InsideCounsel also asked Daley why the PTAB’s decisions have been in favor of patent challengers. Daley believes the early success of patent challengers was due to the fact that weaker patents were being challenged, but patent owners are beginning to have more success before the PTAB.

Tags

America Invents Act (AIA)

Related Practices

专利局无效程序

PTAB无效程序:双方复审及授权后复审

Related Professionals

Kathleen A. Daley
Partner
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4098
Email

Related News

Award/Ranking

Six Finnegan Partners Recognized in the 2026 Lawdragon 500 Leading Global IP Lawyers

June 22, 2026

Award/Ranking

Finnegan Earns Top Rankings in the 2026 Legal 500 U.S. Guide

June 10, 2026

Award/Ranking

World Trademark Review Recognizes Three Finnegan Partners on its 2026 Global Leaders List

June 24, 2026

Commentary

Will the Chicago Cubs Win Their Game Over 'The Rooftop Phenomenon'?

June 8, 2026

Award/Ranking

Forbes Names Finnegan Partner Erika Harmon Arner on its Inaugural 2026 America’s Top Women Lawyers List

June 5, 2026

Award/Ranking

Finnegan Earns Top Rankings in 2026 IAM Patent 1000 Guide; Nearly 60 Attorneys Ranked

May 28, 2026

Award/Ranking

Associates Rank Finnegan “Best of the Best” in BTI Associate Satisfaction Survey

May 7, 2026

Award/Ranking

61 Finnegan Attorneys Recognized on the 2025 Capital Pro Bono Honor Roll

May 7, 2026

Award/Ranking

Finnegan Wins IP Firm of the Year at the 2026 LSPN Awards

May 1, 2026

Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.

  • 隐私
  • 免责申明
  • Legal Notices
  • Fraud Alert
  • EEO Statement
  • Cookies
  • Contact Us

© 2026 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP