In a significant decision, the Acting USPTO Director denied five Inter Partes Review (IPR) petitions, highlighting the petitioner's delay in filing after a patent infringement suit was initiated. The decision was based on the rationale that the petitioner, aware of the patents since 2013, waited too long to challenge them, despite the patent owner waiting nearly as long before suing. The owner contested the IPR's merit, whereas the petitioner contended that the litigation timing did not justify a discretionary denial and argued against the owner's claims.
The Acting USPTO Director exercised discretion to deny five IPR petitions, arguing that the petitioner delayed filing after the patent owner’s infringement suit.
The patent owner’s brief focused largely on attacking the merits of the IPR petitions, claiming the petitioner provided unclear grounds and relied on insufficient evidence.
In rebuttal, the petitioner argued that expectations over the patents were not settled given the patent owner's late enforcement actions in 2024.
The petitioner's delay in filing IPR petitions, despite knowledge of the patents, was highlighted as a central reason for the discretionary denial.
Collection
[
|
...
]