Supreme Court Upholds Inter Partes Review Of Patents As Procedures Used In These Proceedings Continue To Evolve

ML
Milbank LLP

Contributor

Milbank LLP is a leading international law firm that provides innovative legal services from 12 offices around the world. Founded in New York over 150 years ago, Milbank helps the world’s leading commercial, financial and industrial enterprises, as well as institutions, individuals and governments, achieve their strategic objectives.
The Supreme Court recently issued two important patent decisions concerning post‑grant review practice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office's Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).
United States Intellectual Property

The Supreme Court recently issued two important patent decisions concerning post‑grant review practice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office's Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).

In Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene's Energy Group, LLC, No. 16–712 (Apr. 24, 2018), the Court held that inter partes reviews (IPRs) do not violate Article III or the Seventh Amendment of the Constitution. In SAS Institute Inc. v. Iancu, No. 16-969 (Apr. 24, 2018), the Court held that a statutory provision in the Patent Act requires the PTAB to issue patentability decisions on every patent claim challenged in an IPR petition.

These decisions confirm that IPRs will remain a significant feature of patent rights adjudication and as the procedures of these proceedings change, their strategic use by stakeholders will continue to evolve.

Please click here to read the full client alert.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More