Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Columns & DepartmentsThe Intellectual Property StrategistIntellectual PropertyLitigationPatent Litigation

IP News

By Jeff Ginsberg and Ryan J. Sheehan
March 01, 2022
|

Federal Circuit: Applicant Admitted Prior Art Cannot Provide a "Basis" for a Ground of Unpatentability in an IPR, But Can be Cited for Other Purposes

When Congress enacted the America Invents Act and created the inter partes review (IPR) proceeding, it limited an IPR petition to challenging patentability "only on a ground that could be raised under section 102 or 103 [i.e., anticipation and obviousness] and only on the basis of prior art consisting of patents or printed publications." 35 U.S.C. § 311(b). Can the patentee's admissions as to the scope and content of prior art in its own patent or patent application — commonly referred to as applicant admitted prior art (AAPA) — be used in an IPR? According to the Federal Circuit, the answer to that question is "yes" — but not as a "basis" for a ground of unpatentability.

In Qualcomm Inc. v. Apple Inc., Nos. 2020-1558, -1559, 2022 WL 288013 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 1, 2022), Apple filed two petitions for inter partes review, which challenged different claims of the same patent. Both petitions asserted the same two prior-art grounds against the different challenged claims: 1) obviousness over the combination of the "Steinacker" patent, the "Doyle" patent, and the "Park" publication; and 2) obviousness over the combination of the "Majcherczak" publication and AAPA consisting of "Figure 1 and its accompanying description" in the challenged patent.

In the instituted IPRs, the patentee Qualcomm "conceded that the combination of AAPA and Majcherczak teaches each element of the challenged claims." However, Qualcomm argued that such AAPA "cannot be used to challenge the validity of a patent in inter partes review" under the provisions of Section 311(b). The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) rejected that argument in its final written decisions and found the challenged claims to be unpatentable over the combination of the AAPA and the Majcherczak publication. The Board reasoned that the AAPA cited in the petition is prior art contained in a patent (as required by Section 311(b)) because the cited AAPA was disclosed in the challenged patent itself.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Top 5 Strategies for Managing the End-of-Year Collections Frenzy Image

End of year collections are crucial for law firms because they allow them to maximize their revenue for the year, impacting profitability, partner distributions and bonus calculations by ensuring outstanding invoices are paid before the year closes, which is especially important for meeting financial targets and managing cash flow throughout the firm.

The Self-Service Buyer Is On the Rise Image

Law firms and companies in the professional services space must recognize that clients are conducting extensive online research before making contact. Prospective buyers are no longer waiting for meetings with partners or business development professionals to understand the firm's offerings. Instead, they are seeking out information on their own, and they want to do it quickly and efficiently.

Should Large Law Firms Penalize RTO Rebels or Explore Alternatives? Image

Through a balanced approach that combines incentives with accountability, firms can navigate the complexities of returning to the office while maintaining productivity and morale.

Sink or Swim: The Evolving State of Law Firm Administrative Support Image

The paradigm of legal administrative support within law firms has undergone a remarkable transformation over the last decade. But this begs the question: are the changes to administrative support successful, and do law firms feel they are sufficiently prepared to meet future business needs?

Tax Treatment of Judgments and Settlements Image

Counsel should include in its analysis of a case the taxability of the anticipated and sought after damages as the tax effect could be substantial.