USPTO Recent Precedential and Informative Decisions: Lessons for PTAB Practice

On Sept. 20, 2018, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) created the precedential opinion panel (POP), which streamlines the process for designating PTAB decisions as precedential or informative. Since that time, the USPTO designated 11 America Invents Act (AIA) decisions as either precedential or informative, which should bring more predictability and uniformity to the PTAB.

These decisions address important issues, including (1) introduction of new evidence at rehearing, (2) presentation of live testimony at oral argument, (3) issue joinder, (4) the PTAB's discretion to deny institution pursuant to 35 U.S.C. Sections 314 and 316, (5) real party in interest (RPI), and (6) privity. With this guidance, the PTAB has provided clarity for practitioners to analyze these issues going forward.

Listen as our authoritative panel of patent attorneys examines the recent PTAB precedential or informative decisions and discusses what they mean for PTAB practice. The panel will examine the introduction of new evidence at the rehearing, issue joinder, live testimony at oral hearings, and the PTAB's discretion to deny institution according to 35 U.S.C. Sections 314 and 316, among other things.

1. Recent precedential decisions
   1. Amazon.com Inc. v. Uniloc Luxembourg S.A., Case IPR2017-00948 (PTAB Jan. 18, 2019) (Paper No. 34)
   2. Lectrosonics Inc. v. Zaxcom Inc., Case IPR2018-01129 (PTAB Feb. 25, 2019) (Paper No. 15)
   3. Proppant Express Investments L.L.C. v. Oren Techs. L.L.C., Case IPR2018-00914 (PTAB Mar. 13, 2019) (Paper No. 38)
   4. Huawei Device Co. Ltd. v. Optis Cellular Tech. L.L.C., Case IPR2018-00816 (PTAB Jan. 8, 2019) (Paper No. 19)
   5. DePuy Synthes Prods. Inc. v. Medidea L.L.C., Case IPR2018-00315 (PTAB Jan. 23, 2019) (Paper No. 29)
   6. Ventex Co. Ltd. v. Columbia Sportswear North America Inc., Case IPR2017-00651 (PTAB Jan. 24, 2019) (Paper No. 148)
   7. Proppant Express Investments L.L.C. v. Oren Techs. L.L.C., Case IPR2017-01917 (PTAB Feb. 13, 2019) (Paper No. 86)
   8. Adello Biologics L.L.C. v. Amgen Inc., Case PGR2019-00001 (PTAB Feb. 14, 2019) (Paper No. 11)
2. Recent informative decisions
   1. Chevron Oronite Co. L.L.C. v. Infineum USA L.P., Case IPR2018-00923 (PTAB Nov. 7, 2018) (Paper No. 9)
   2. Deeper, UAB v. Vexilar Inc., Case IPR2019-01310 (PTAB Jan. 24, 2019) (Paper No. 7)
   3. Hulu L.L.C. v. Sound View Innovations L.L.C., Case IPR2018-01039 (PTAB Apr. 3, 2019) (Paper No. 15)
3. Practical guidance for addressing critical issues
   1. How to seek POP review
   2. Motions to amend
   3. Issue joinder
   4. New evidence at rehearing
   5. Live testimony at the oral hearing
   6. PTAB discretion to deny institution under Sections 314 and 316
   7. RPI
   8. Privity

The panel will review these and other key issues:

• What guidance has the PTAB provided regarding the introduction of live testimony at oral argument and the introduction of new evidence at rehearing?
• What do these decisions tell practitioners about the PTAB's discretion to deny institution of a claim under 35 U.S.C. Sections 314 and 316?
• What are the lessons from the precedential and informative decisions for PTAB practice?