Co-authored by Prateek Viswanathan*
By creating the new
precedential Fintiv factors, the PTAB provides
guidance on what it will consider when deciding whether to deny
institution of an IPR petition challenging patent claims that are
also being litigated in a parallel proceeding.
The PTAB may not authorize the institution of an IPR unless it
determines that the information in the petition and any response
"show that there is a reasonable likelihood that the
petitioner would prevail with respect to at least 1 of the claims
challenged in the petition." 35 U.S.C. § 314(a). But the
PTAB has determined that it has discretion to deny an IPR even when
there is such a "reasonable likelihood," according to
seven non-exhaustive factors set out in General Plastic.
General Plastic Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Canon Kabushiki
Kaisha, IPR2016-01357, Paper 19, § II.B.4.i (PTAB Sept.
6, 2017) (precedential).