The PTAB has been very active in designating decisions precedential and informative in 2019. Here’s a recap of designations so far:
Real parties in interest, 35 U.S.C. §§ 312(a)(2), 322(a)(2)
- Precedential – Adello Biologics LLC v. Amgen Inc., Case PGR2019-00001, Paper 11 (Feb. 14, 2019) [AIA § 322(a)(2), pre-institution update to Mandatory Notices to add RPI]
- Precedential – Proppant Express Investments, LLC v. Oren Techs., LLC, Case IPR2017-01917, Paper 86 (Feb. 13, 2019) [AIA §§ 312(a)(2), 315(b), post-institution update to Mandatory Notices to add RPI]
- Precedential – Ventex Co., Ltd. v. Columbia Sportswear N. Am., Inc., Case IPR2017-00651, Paper 152 (Jan. 24, 2019) [AIA §§ 312(a)(2), 315(b), terminating proceeding where Petition failed to name time-barred RPI and privy]
Requirements of Petition, 35 U.S.C. §§ 312(a)(3)
- Informative – Adaptics Ltd. v. Perfect Co., Case IPR2018-01596, Paper 20 (Mar. 6, 2019) [AIA §§ 312(a)(3), 314(a), deny institution – failure to identify grounds with particularity]
Institution, 35 U.S.C. § 314(a)
- Precedential – Valve Corp. v. Elec. Scripting Prods., Inc., Case IPR2019-00064, -00065, -00085, Paper 10 (May 1, 2019) [AIA § 314(a), deny institution – General Plastic factor 1 applies to joined Petitioner]
- Precedential – Valve Corp. v. Elec. Scripting Prods., Inc., Case IPR2019-00062, -00063, -00084, Paper 11 (Apr. 2, 2019) [deny institution – General Plastic factors apply to different Petitioner]
- Informative – Adaptics Ltd. v. Perfect Co., Case IPR2018-01596, Paper 20 (Mar. 6, 2019) [AIA §§ 312(a)(3), 314(a), deny institution – failure to identify grounds with particularity]
- Informative – Chevron Oronite Co. LLC v. Infineum USA L.P., Case IPR2018-00923, Paper 9 (Nov. 7, 2018) [insufficient number of proposed grounds/challenges to claims meet reasonable likelihood standard]
- Informative – Deeper, UAB v. Vexilar, Inc., Case IPR2018-01310, Paper 7 (Jan. 24, 2019) [insufficient number of proposed grounds/challenges to claims meet reasonable likelihood standard]
Bar due to petitioner’s action, 35 U.S.C. § 315(a)
Bar due to patent owner’s action, 35 U.S.C. § 315(b)
- Precedential – Infiltrator Water Techs., LLC, v. Presby Patent Trust, Case IPR2018-00224, Paper 25 (Oct. 1, 2018) [AIA § 315(b) – applying Click-to-Call to a complaint dismissed without prejudice for lack of personal jurisdiction]
- Precedential – GoPro, Inc. v. 360Heros, Inc., Case IPR2018-01754, Paper 38 (Aug. 23, 2019) [AIA § 315(b), one-year time bar triggered after the service of a complaint, regardless of whether the serving party lacked standing to sue or the pleading was otherwise deficient]
- Precedential – Proppant Express Investments, LLC v. Oren Techs., LLC, Case IPR2017-01917, Paper 86 (Feb. 13, 2019) [AIA §§ 312(a)(2), 315(b), post-institution update to Mandatory Notices to add RPI]
- Precedential – Ventex Co., Ltd. v. Columbia Sportswear N. Am., Inc., Case IPR2017-00651, Paper 152 (Jan. 24, 2019) [AIA §§ 312(a)(2), 315(b), terminating proceeding where Petition failed to name time-barred RPI and privy
Joinder, 35 U.S.C. § 315(c)
Motions to amend, 35 U.S.C. § 316(d)
- Precedential – Amazon.com, Inc. v. Uniloc Luxembourg S.A., Case IPR2017-00948, Paper 34 (Jan. 18, 2019) [AIA § 316(d), grounds that can be raised against substitute claims]
- Precedential – Lectrosonics, Inc. v. Zaxcom, Inc., Case IPR2018-01129, 01130, Paper 15 (Feb. 25, 2019) [AIA § 316(d), requirements and burden
Oral argument, 37 C.F.R. § 42.70
Request for rehearing, 37 C.F.R. § 42.71(d)
