直 Japanese PDF Font
  • Our Professionals
  • Our Work
  • Our Insights
  • Offices
  • Firm
  • Careers
Finnegan
  • News
  • Finnegan Facts
  • History
    • Finnegan VISION
    • Finnegan FORWARD
  • Pro Bono
  • Management
    • 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

專利局受理之無效程序

專利審理暨訴願委員會受理之無效程序: 多方複審及核准後複審

Related Professionals

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

Related News

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

Press Release

BMW AG Announces Resolution of WDTX Declaratory Judgment against Onesta, Following Broad Covenant Not to Sue to BMW AG by Onesta

April 23, 2026

Commentary

Heartflow Accuses Rival of Building Competing AI Heart Tech on Stolen Secrets

April 23, 2026

Commentary

Taylor Swift 'The Life of a Showgirl' Case Heads to Key May Hearing

April 22, 2026

Press Release

BMW AG Secures Complete Victory at Federal Circuit as Onesta IP, LLC Appeal is Dismissed and Costs Awarded to BMW

April 20, 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