Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 28 FEBRUARY 2022

PTAB Bucks Trend And Institutes IPR, Rejecting Fintiv Argument Based On Parallel ITC Proceeding

The Board instituted an inter partes review against a challenged patent that was asserted in a parallel International Trade Commission (ITC) Section 337 Investigation.

United StatesIntellectual Property

Volkswagon Group of America, Inc. v. Arigna Technology Ltd., IPR2021-01321, Paper 10 (PTAB Feb. 15, 2022).
Before: Baer, Fenick, and Ahmed

The Board instituted an inter partes review against a challenged patent that was asserted in a parallel International Trade Commission (ITC) Section 337 Investigation. In doing so, the Board rejected Patent Owner's arguments that the Board should exercise its discretion and deny institution under 35 U.S.C. § 314(a).

Central to the Board's analysis was its precedential decision in Apple Inc. v. Fintiv Inc., IPR2020-00019, Paper 11 (PTAB Mar. 20, 2020) (precedential) (Fintiv), which identifies a non-exclusive list of factors parties may address when there is a related, parallel court or ITC action to determine whether such action provides a basis for discretionary denial. The factors include:

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from