ARTICLE
15 August 2019

New PTAB Guide Creates Uncertainty As To Multiple Petition Situations

SM
Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton

Contributor

Sheppard Mullin is a full service Global 100 firm with over 1,000 attorneys in 16 offices located in the United States, Europe and Asia. Since 1927, companies have turned to Sheppard Mullin to handle corporate and technology matters, high stakes litigation and complex financial transactions. In the US, the firm’s clients include more than half of the Fortune 100.
The USPTO published its second update to the PTAB Trial and Practice Guide last month. The section addressing procedures for addressing multiple challenges to a patent is a new and noteworthy addition
United States Intellectual Property

The USPTO published its second update to the PTAB Trial and Practice Guide last month. The section addressing procedures for addressing multiple challenges to a patent is a new and noteworthy addition.

In the new section addressing "parallel petitions challenging the same patent" by the same petitioner, the Board states that, "one petition should be sufficient to challenge the claims of a patent in most situations. Two or more petitions filed against the same patent at or about the same time (e.g., before the first preliminary response by the patent owner) may place a substantial and unnecessary burden on the Board and the patent owner and could raise fairness, timing, and efficiency concerns."

The Guide notes that "there may be circumstances in which more than one petition may be necessary" and provides examples of when the patent owner has asserted a large number of claims in litigation or when there is a dispute about priority date. The new procedure requires that, when a petitioner files more than one petition challenging the same patent, the petitioner should rank the petitions and explain in its petition or in a separate filing the differences between the petitions, why the differences are material, and why the Board should exercise its discretion to institute additional petitions.

This change is puzzling given the complexities of many patents involved in PTAB challenges, the payment of fees for each petition being challenge, and the likelihood that the Guide will only result in further gamesmanship by plaintiffs. For example, plaintiffs will now likely try to delay revealing claim construction positions or claims being asserted even more in an effort to prevent any PTAB challenge of claims being asserted in litigation.

It remains to be seen what justifications will satisfy particular PTAB panels. Petitioners will need to carefully consider what reasons are most compelling, including for example competing claim constructions, the sheer number of claims at issue, the complexity of the technology, and priority issues.

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.

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