• Home
  • About
    • Client Reviews
    • Patent Samples
    • Accolades
    • About Firm
    • Technologies
    • FAQs
  • Services
    • Patent
      • Utility Patents
      • Design Patents
      • Patent Application
      • Patent Defense
      • Patent Enforcement
      • Working with In-House Attorneys
    • Trademark
      • Trademark Search
      • Trademark Application
      • Trademark Enforcement
      • Trademark Defense
    • Licensing
    • Worldwide IP
    • Risk Management
    • Due Diligence
  • Industries
    • Browse Patent Samples
    • Automotive Patents
    • Construction Patents
    • Consumer Products Patents
    • Electronics Patents
    • Food, Beverage, & Other Culinary Patents
    • Manufacturing Patents
    • Medical Products & Devices Patents
    • Optics Patents
    • Software & App Patents
    • Tools & Equipment Patents
  • Learning Resources
    • First-Time Inventor?
    • Why Patent Your Invention in a Bad Economy?
    • Videos on Patents
    • Search 180+ Articles
      • Patent process
        • Overview of Patent Process
          • Patent process timeline and major milestones
          • Patent Process: Invention to Patent Granted (Simplified)
          • Patent process, overall steps and procedures
        • Overview of the examination process within the USPTO
          • Highs and lows of securing patent protection for your invention
          • What is the Patent Office procedure after filing a patent application?
        • Benefits of a Patent Search
          • What is a patent search and How to do it?
        • Patent attorneys, agents and the USPTO can help with the patent process
        • USPTO Website
      • Invention Agreements
        • What is an NDA and when to use them?
        • How to use a contract to protect your invention?
        • Working with others without losing your IP rights
        • Patent Assignments for Independent Contractors
        • Losing Invention Rights When Hiring or Collaborating with Others
        • Avoid Problems: Get an Invention Assignment Agreement
      • Protect Inventions
        • Misconceptions of Provisional Patent Applications
        • Do you need to get your patent attorney to sign an NDA?
        • Can a confidentiality agreement protect me like a patent application?
        • Four types of intellectual property to protect your idea and how to use them
          • Overview of Patents and Intellectual Property
          • Patent protection benefits and why every inventor should consider getting one
          • 8 tips to successfully protect your idea
          • Benefits of Patent Protection
          • Best uses for design patents
        • Reasons to only market your invention after securing patent pendency
          • Dangers of 1 yr grace period under first-inventor-to-file system
          • File a patent application before telling others about the invention
        • Risks and benefits of securing software patent protection
          • Strategy to overcome patentable subject matter rejection
        • Pros and cons of filing a continuation-in-part application
          • What is a continuation patent application?
      • How Patent Applications Work: the Basics
        • How to respond to an office action?
        • Request for non-publication of a patent application
        • Anatomy of a Patent Document
        • How to write a broad patent application?
        • Design patents: pros and cons
      • Patent costs
        • How much does it cost to get a utility patent?
        • Provisional Patent Application: Cheap Alternative?
        • Patent Cost Framework and cash flow
        • Provisional patent application: a cheap option?
        • Cheap provisional patent applications
      • Patent infringement
        • Basics of writing a patent claim for a patent application
        • Patent Marking: Everything you wanted to know
        • Avoiding Patent Infringement
        • Can I Copy My Competitor’s Product?
        • Can I Copy My Competitor’s Product? (Design Patent)
      • Worldwide patents
        • Pros and cons of securing worldwide patent protection and their steps
        • Foreign patent filing to secure protection in other countries
      • Responding to Office Actions
        • Overview of Office Actions
      • Trademarks
        • Trademark Registration: common law, state and federal
        • How to obtain a federal trademark registration?
        • How to select a trademark?
          • Protect your idea when pitching to an investor, potential licensee, or buyer
  • Schedule Consultation
  • Contact

Top-Rated Orange County Patent Lawyer | Helping Inventors in Orange County, Los Angeles County & Beyond | OC Patent Lawyer, Irvine CA

Orange County Patent Attorney

(949) 433-0900
You are here: Home / Patent Infringement / IPR an attractive alternative to litigation

IPR an attractive alternative to litigation

February 18, 2015 by James Yang

IPRBottom line: Defendants should strongly consider an Inter Partes Review (IPR), a proceeding before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) when accused of patent infringement because it may be easier to invalidate the patent at the PTAB instead of at the Federal district court.  In re Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC (Fed. Cir. 2015), the Federal Circuit held that the claims are given their “broadest reasonable interpretation” during an IPR, and not the more narrow “ordinary and customary meaning to one of ordinary skill in the art” that would be applied at the district court.  Under the broader standard, more prior art can be asserted against the patent being asserted, and in this sense, the patent is more likely to be invalidated.

In Cuozzo, the claimed invention was directed to an automobile speed limiter which displayed both a vehicle’s current speed and the speed limit.  When the current speed is above the speed limit, then the speed limit is displayed as a red light.  The current speed is displayed in white light when it is below the speed limit.  The claims required that the speedometer 12 be “integrally attached” to the colored display 18.  (see diagram below).  A major portion of the opinion was dedicated to explaining whether the IPR should apply the broadest reasonable interpretation standard typically applied during the examination of a claim or the standard that the district court would have applied which would have resulted in a more narrow interpretation.  Presumably, this issue was important to the parties because a broader interpretation may have invalidated the claim or avoided infringement, whereas a narrow interpretation may have preserved validity and brought the defendant within the scope of the assertions for infringement.

The Federal Circuit held that the proper standard for interpreting claims in an IPR is the broadest reasonable interpretation standard.  This opinion had a dissenting opinion.  In comparing the reasons provided by the majority and the dissenter, the opinion really could have gone both ways.  The decision came down to a philosophical discussion of whether the IPR should mimic more of an examination proceeding such as when the patent office is reviewing the claims of a patent application or an adjudicatory role such as one during formal litigation which resolves a dispute between parties.

During an examination proceeding, the claims can be amended as many times as needed.  For example, if the broadest reasonable interpretation given by the examiner results in the claims being deemed anticipated or obvious, then the applicant can amend the claim language to resolve the issues raised by the examiner.  In this situation, the broadest reasonable interpretation standard does not harm the inventor’s position much.  On the other hand, during litigation between diametrically opposed parties, the patent applicant has no ability to amend the claims.  Also, the rights of two opposing parties are being adjudicated.  Hence, one cannot take the broadest reasonable interpretation since doing so may invalidate a patent that should be held valid or cause a defendant to be infringing when he/she shouldn’t be liable for patent infringement.

Regardless of one’s philosophical leanings, based on this decision, it appears that the IPR can be an effective way for a defendant to invalidate a patent.  The broadest reasonable interpretation standard is very broad because the examiner is given great latitude in defining a claim term.  In my patent prosecution experience, I have had many interpretations that appeared to go well beyond the broadest reasonable interpretation but in the end, I amended the claims to address the examiner’s concerns.  It would be almost impossible to appeal and win against an examiner’s broadest reasonable interpretation. Additionally, unlike normal examination, during the IPR, the patent owner is given one opportunity to amend the claims or present a reasonable number of claims to avoid invalidity of its patent.  They are not given an unfettered right to amend such as during examination.  This increases the stakes for the patent owner to get it right the first time.  It would be dangerous to slightly narrow the scope of the claims to avoid the prior art to maintain validity.  The reason is that the new claim language might still be invalid under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the new claim language.  If the patent owner got it wrong the first time, then it would be fatal to the underlying potential patent infringement case.  The patent owner would need to significantly narrow the claim language to ensure validity is maintained.  In narrowing the claims, the patent owner also needs to keep an eye on the ball by not excessively narrowing the claims because for the patent owner, the claims must cover the defendant’s products or methods.

Related article: PTAB must institute all challenged claims if a single claim threshold is met

Even though the IPR is attractive for defendants, there may be other mitigating factors that might persuade one to litigate the issue at the district court instead of proceeding with the IPR.  For example, IPRs have limited discovery and the defendant would be estopped from making the same arguments made during the IPR at the district court level.

I invite you to contact me with your patent questions at (949) 433-0900. Please feel free to forward this article to your friends. As an Orange County Patent Attorney, I serve Orange County, Irvine, Los Angeles, San Diego and surrounding cities.

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn

Author

James Yang is a patent attorney. For more than 16 years, James Yang has been representing clients to secure patent protection for their inventions and register trademarks to protect their brands. If you need help, call him at (949) 433-0900. Read More…

Popular Posts

  • Patent process overview
  • Patent process explained
  • How much does a patent cost?
  • Why patent your invention in a bad economy?

Patent Book

Navigating the Patent System - new book by Orange County patent attorney, James Yang

Navigating the Patent System: Learn the patent process and strategies to protect your invention

Read for Free
Buy at Amazon

RECEIVE PATENT ARTICLES

Stay up to date on major changes and get tips on the patent process.

We respect your privacy.

Popular Posts

Patent process overview
Patent process explained
How much does a patent cost?
Trademark process and costs
Patent process and costs

 

Services

Utility Patents
Design Patents
Patent Prosecution Services
Patent Defense Services
Patent-Law Counsel for In-House Attorneys
Trademark Prosecution Services
See All Services

Industries

Automotive Patents
Consumer Products Patents
Culinary Patents
Manufacturing Patents
Medical Patents
Optics Patents
Software & App Patents
See All Industries

Contact

James Yang
OC Patent Lawyer
2372 Morse Ave., Suite #178
Irvine, CA 92614
Tel: (949) 433-0900

Connect

  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn

Sitemaps

Sitemap: Pages | Sitemap: Posts

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

By accessing this blog, you agree that no attorney-client relationship is formed except by a subsequent written retainer agreement. Also, you agree to not send confidential information unless directed by me to do so. The information posted on this blog is legal information and not legal advice.
Complete Terms of Use
Complete Privacy Policy

ADA Compliance

OC Patent Lawyer aims to ensure that its services are accessible to people with disabilities.
Accessibility Statement

Service Area

From our office in Irvine, California, we serve clients from all areas within Orange County and Los Angeles County, California.

© 2023 · James Yang, Your Entrepreneur and Mid-Size Business Patent Attorney