United States: Intex v. Bestway: The PTAB Does Not Always Conduct A Claim-By-Claim Analysis At The Institution Stage, And Evidence From A Parallel Litigation May Increase The Likelihood That The PTAB Will Institute A Review Of All The Challenged Patent Claims

Last Updated: October 6 2016
Article by John A. Marlott

The PTAB's recent institution decision in Intex v. Bestway (IPR2016-00180) is notable for two reasons: (1) it demonstrates that the PTAB does not always conduct a claim-by-claim analysis of every challenged claim in a petition before electing to institute a post-grant review; and (2) it shows that providing information to the PTAB about a parallel district court litigation may increase the likelihood that the PTAB institutes review as to all the claims challenged by a petitioner.

(1) Under 35 U.S.C. § 314(a), the PTAB may institute an IPR if it determines that "there is a reasonable likelihood that the petitioner would prevail with respect to at least 1 of the claims challenged in the petition." A similar threshold standard applies to PGRs and CBMs under § 324(a), requiring the petitioner to show that "at least 1 of the claims challenged in the petition is unpatentable."

Although the AIA thus authorizes the PTAB to institute a post-grant review upon determining that "at least 1 of the claims challenged in the petition" satisfies the applicable statutory threshold, the PTAB ordinarily conducts a claim-by-claim analysis at the institution stage to determine whether the petitioner has met the threshold as to each and every challenged claim. In Intex v. Bestway, however, the PTAB made a decision to institute based on a threshold determination as to only one challenged claim, independent claim 1. As explained by the PTAB, "having decided that [the prior art] Blomquist [reference] evinces a reasonable likelihood that at least one of the claims challenged in the Petition is unpatentable, we exercise our discretion under 37 C.F.R. § 42.108 to have the review proceed on all of the challenged claims." IPR2016-00180, Paper No. 13 at 8 (emphasis in original). The PTAB further observed that claim 1 "recites the key feature" of the alleged invention, and that "[t]here is commonality of invention among the claims, as the other independent claims—claims 5 and 10—include this same feature." Id. at 10. The PTAB thus instituted the IPR on all of challenged claims 1-14 (and on all the proposed grounds of unpatentability based on Blomquist) based on the petitioner's threshold showing as to just one claim (claim 1). Id.

The PTAB made a similar decision instituting the IPR as to all of challenged claims 1-14 in view of an additional prior art ground of unpatentability based on the petitioner's prior art showing (regarding the Intex Video) as to just a single claim (claim 10). Id. at 11-12.

(2) In its decision instituting the IPR as to all the challenged claims in Intex v. Bestway, the PTAB observed that

Congress, in enacting the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA), contemplated that, "[i]deally," inter partes review "will completely substitute for at least the patents-and-printed publications portion of the civil litigation." 157 Cong. Rec. S1376 (daily ed. Mar. 8, 2011) (statement of Sen. Kyl) (emphasis added). But, where the Board grants review of some of the challenged claims and not others, "[t]he validity of claims for which the Board [does] not institute inter partes review can still be litigated in district court." Synopsys, Inc. v. Mentor Graphics Corp., 814 F.3d 1309, 1316 (Fed. Cir. 2016)

IPR2016-00180, Paper No. 13 at 8-9.

In deciding to conduct the IPR as to all the claims challenged in the petition in Intex v. Bestway, the PTAB expressly referenced a parallel district court litigation. The district court had preliminarily stayed the action (by agreement of the parties) pending the PTAB's institution decision regarding the asserted patent. The PTAB recognized that the district court might lift the stay, resulting in duplicative proceedings, if the PTAB were to address in the IPR fewer than all the challenged claims:

[A] partial institution could very well result in a serial or parallel process where the Board reviews some claims of the challenged patent and the district court reviews other claims. Indeed, that could be the outcome here because the district court, in the related litigation, has made clear that "should the USPTO institute review of some, but not all of the Challenged Claims, the parties should prepare to move forward and expeditiously litigate this action." Ex. 3001, at 2 n.2. Thus, anything short of institution on all of the challenged claims in the instant proceeding may result in the district court lifting the current stay and reviewing at least the non-instituted claims in parallel with our review of the instituted claims.

IPR2016-00180, Paper No. 13 at 9. Citing Synopsys, 814 F.3d at 1313, the PTAB also concluded that "maintaining the stay at the district court and instituting review on all of the challenged claims will avert the potential for an 'improper collateral attack' on our findings and conclusions." IPR2016-00180, Paper No. 13 at 9-10.

Under the circumstances here, in view of the parallel litigation, the PTAB ultimately determined that reviewing all the challenged claims in the IPR was necessary to achieve the "central purpose" of the AIA:

[L]est we undermine the AIA's central purpose of achieving finality of validity review at the Board instead of the district court, efficiency and fairness dictate that we exercise our discretion, in this particular case, to institute review on all of the claims and on all of the grounds on which Blomquist serves as the primary basis for unpatentability.

Id. at 10. Instituting the IPR on all of the challenged claims in this factual scenario, according to the PTAB, "will save the district court and the parties from possibly having to address the same validity issues in a parallel or serial action." Id. at 12.

Practice Tip

If there is parallel district court litigation involving the challenged patent, the petitioner should consider submitting information to the PTAB demonstrating that all the challenged claims are at issue in the litigation. Doing so may increase the likelihood that the PTAB will institute a post-grant review of all the challenged claims. This is particularly true if, as in Intex v. Bestway, the district court has conditioned a stay of the parallel litigation on the PTAB conducting a review of all the challenged claims.

Intex Recreation Corp. v. Bestway Inflatables & Material Corp., IPR2016-00180 (Jun. 6, 2016) (Paper 13).

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.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
 
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions