Supreme Court Upholds IPR Proceedings; Rejects Partial Institutions

raza15 Comments
Categories: Asma Raza

Two Supreme Court Decisions came down April 24, 2018 with potentially significant impacts on patent practice. First, in Oil States v. Greene’s Energy, the Court rejected Oil States’ Article III and 7th Amendment challenges to inter partes review (IPR) proceedings, declaring the proceedings constitutional under the public rights doctrine. Second, the Court ruled that Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Final Written Decisions must address the patentability of all challenged claims if an IPR is instituted in SAS Institute v. Iancu, eliminating partial institutions.

Oil States Energy Services v. Greene’s Energy Group

After Oil States Energy Services sued Greene’s Energy Group for infringement in federal district court, Greene’s Energy challenged the patent at the PTAB, successfully arguing the patent was invalid. Oil States then appealed the decision to the Federal Circuit, challenging both the decision and the constitutionality of IPR proceedings at the PTAB as a whole. Oil States argued that patents were a private right and that actions revoking a patent must be limited to Article III courts before a jury, and alternatively that the Seventh Amendment requires a jury trial as patent validity was traditionally decided by a jury. Attempting to distinguish IPR proceedings from re-examination proceedings, which have previously been ruled constitutional, Oil States pointed out how the adversarial process of IPR proceedings mimicked the procedure of Article III courts, while re-examination mimicked the prosecution process at the PTO.

The Court’s 7-2 decision to uphold rested primarily on the finding that because patent rights are public rights, reconsideration of those rights need not be reviewed in an Article III court. Public rights are those “arising between the government and others, which from their nature do not require judicial determination and yet are susceptible of it.”[1] The Court then explained that to whatever extent patent rights are granted to a patent holder, they are statutory rights which cannot exceed the scope allowed by statute. The Court reasons that since the AIA is a statutory limitation of the patent rights, any rights granted to the patent owner are granted subject to continual review by the PTO and possible revocation.[2] Based on this construction reserving review for the PTAB, the Court resolved the Seventh Amendment challenge as moot, since it only applies when Congress has not properly assigned a matter to adjudication outside of an Article III tribunal.

Justice Gorsuch, joined by Justice Roberts, dissented from the opinion, specifically objecting to the conflation of the constitutional power of the executive to issue patents with the power to also revoke patents. He concludes his detailed history of the difference between those powers with an appeal to Article III’s purpose, explaining that “enforcing Article III isn’t about protecting judicial authority for its own sake. It’s about ensuring the people today and tomorrow enjoy no fewer rights against governmental intrusion than those who came before. And the loss of the right to an independent judge is never a small thing.”[3]

Despite these concerns, the Oil States decision has assured that any patent rights enjoyed today and tomorrow will be subject to review at the PTAB.

SAS Institute v. Iancu

SAS Institute challenged all 16 claims in ComplementSofts’s software patent in an inter partes review proceeding before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).  The PTAB instituted review on only some of the claims (claims 1 and 3-10).  The PTAB found claims 1, 3, and 5-10 invalid in the Final Written Decision, only upholding the validity of claim 4. SAS appealed this decision to the Federal Circuit, objecting to the PTAB’s failure to address all 16 challenged claims. The Federal Circuit upheld the PTAB in a 2-1 decision, which the Supreme Court has now reversed 5-4.

The majority relies on the plain language of the statute, the America Invents Act (AIA), in its ruling that the PTAB must address all challenged claims once it institutes an IPR. Justice Gorsuch, the author of the majority opinion, declared, “The statute, we find, supplies a clear answer: the Patent Office must ‘issue a final written decision with respect to the patentability of any patent claim challenged by the petitioner.’ In this context, as in so many others, ‘any’ means ‘every.’”[4]

This holding will impact the PTAB’s procedures, taking away their discretion to partially deny institution on individual challenged claims where they do not find a ‘reasonable likelihood of success”. Justice Ginsburg emphasizes efficiency as a concern in her dissenting opinion, rhetorically asking “Why should the statute be read to preclude the Board’s more rational way to weed out insubstantial challenges?. . . the Court’s opinion offers no persuasive answer to that question, and no cause to believe Congress wanted the board to spend its time so uselessly.”[5]

The removal of the PTAB’s current institution practice puts Director Iancu’s plan for issuing updated procedural guidance to the PTAB in the spotlight moving forward, and emphasizes the importance of the multiple patent reform bills currently being debated in Congress as potential solutions.

Meanwhile, the Court has remanded this case to be decided in accordance with their statutory interpretation, and the outcome will bear watching as it continues.


  1. If you desire to grow your familiarity simply keep visiting this web
    site and be updated with the newest news update posted here.

  2. Hi there! I realize this is sort of off-topic but I had
    to ask. Does managing a well-established website like yours require a massive amount work?

    I’m completely new to running a blog but I do write
    in my diary daily. I’d like to start a blog so I
    can share my personal experience and thoughts online.
    Please let me know if you have any kind of recommendations or tips for new
    aspiring blog owners. Thankyou!

  3. Hey There. I discovered your blog using msn. This is a very well
    written article. I will make sure to bookmark it and return to learn more of your helpful info.

    Thank you for the post. I will certainly comeback.

  4. Terrific work! That is the kind of info that are meant to be
    shared across the internet. Disgrace on the seek engines for not positioning
    this publish higher! Come on over and visit my website
    . Thanks =)

  5. Wow! This blog looks exactly like my old one! It’s on a totally different subject but it has pretty much the
    same layout and design. Wonderful choice of colors!

  6. Howdy! Someone in my Myspace group shared this site with
    us so I came to take a look. I’m definitely loving the information. I’m
    bookmarking and will be tweeting this to my followers!
    Great blog and fantastic design and style.

  7. Everything is very open with a very clear clarification of the issues.
    It was definitely informative. Your site is extremely helpful.
    Many thanks for sharing!

  8. There’s definately a lot to learn about this subject. I love all of the points you’ve made.

  9. Hi! I could have sworn I’ve been to this web site before but after going through some of the articles I realized it’s new to me.
    Anyhow, I’m certainly happy I discovered it and I’ll be book-marking
    it and checking back frequently! quest bars quest bars

  10. This post gives clear idea designed for the new people of blogging, that genuinely how
    to do running a blog. cheap flights cheap

  11. Very nice write-up. I certainly appreciate this website.
    Continue the good work! asmr asmr

  12. Greetings from Carolina! I’m bored to death at work so I
    decided to browse your blog on my iphone during lunch break.

    I love the knowledge you present here and can’t wait to take a look when I get home.
    I’m shocked at how quick your blog loaded on my phone
    .. I’m not even using WIFI, just 3G .. Anyways, awesome blog!
    scoliosis surgery scoliosis surgery

  13. I don’t know whether it’s just me or if everybody
    else encountering problems with your website.
    It appears as though some of the written text on your posts are running off the screen. Can someone
    else please provide feedback and let me know if this is happening to them too?

    This could be a problem with my browser because I’ve had this happen before.
    Appreciate it

  14. Way cool! Some very valid points! I appreciate you penning
    this write-up and also the rest of the site is really good.

  15. It’s nearly impossible to find experienced people on this
    subject, but you sound like you know what you’re talking about!

Leave Comments

Contact Us

Monday – Saturday: 9 am to 6 pm
Sunday: day off