Abstract
The recent passing of the America Invents Act came with the creation of three brand new forms of post-issuance review: inter partes review, post-grant review, and covered business method patent review. Through the first three years, inter partes review has been widely utilized, while covered business method patent review has received considerable attention as well. However, the PTAB has created a procedural tool not explicitly included in either the statutes or regulations. The issue with this procedural tool is the costly estoppel effects it could have on the petitioner in the event of an unfavorable decision either at the PTAB or Federal Circuit level. This Comment suggests two potential solutions: (1) the PTAB could conditionally institute proceedings on all grounds it agrees show a reasonable likelihood of success, have the petitioner choose what it thinks are the strongest grounds for unpatentability, and continue the proceeding based on those grounds; or (2) interpret the statute so that determinations of redundancy are appealable to the Federal Circuit, allowing the petitioner to subsequently assert those grounds of unpatentability if it can demonstrate that they are not redundant.
Recommended Citation
Bob High,
Redundant Prior Art References and Their Prejudicial Effects on Post-Issuance Review Petitioners,
65
Emory L. J.
581
(2015).
Available at:
https://scholarlycommons.law.emory.edu/elj/vol65/iss2/10