The Supreme Court will consider the question of whether time-bar determinations rendered by the PTAB are reviewable by the Federal Circuit. The AIA statute precludes institution of a trial proceeding when the petition is filed more than one year after the date on which the petitioner, real party in interest, or privy of the petitioner is served with a complaint alleging infringement. Parties at the PTAB have sought judicial review of PTAB determinations concerning the applicability of this time-bar provision. In Wi-Fi One, LLC v. Broadcom Corp., 878 F.3d 1364 (Fed. Cir. 2018), a divided Federal Circuit sitting en banc held that time-bar determinations under § 315(b) are subject to judicial review. The Supreme Court has granted certiorari to review this practice.
The Supreme Court has taken interest in statutory interpretation issues involving the AIA in the context of PTAB trial proceedings. The Court interpreted the scope of appeal under § 314(d) and the Patent Office's authority to establish regulations under §316(a)(4)) in Cuozzo Speed Techs. v. Lee, as well as the scope of final written decisions under § 318(a)) in SAS Institute v. Iancu. More recently, the Court considered the meaning of a "person" in the context of AIA in Return Mail Inc. v. United States Postal Service, discussed here. Dex Media continues this trend.
The case is Dex Media Inc. v. Click-To-Call Technologies, LP, Case No. 18-916, in the Supreme Court.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
