Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down an important decision regarding the standards for establishing invalidity in inter partes reviews. These reviews, carried out in the Patent Office, allow a challenger to seek to cancel a patent’s claims. The Supreme Court in Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC v. Lee, affirmed the USPTO practice of construing the claims using the “broadest reasonable interpretation” for the claims—a standard that makes invalidity more likely. The Court also confirmed that the decision to institute inter partes review is not subject to judicial review. Hovey Williams LLP prepared and filed the petition against Cuozzo on behalf of Garmin, the very first petition ever filed for inter partes review. Garmin did not participate in the Supreme Court review having settled previously with Cuozzo. 

Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down an important decision regarding the standards for establishing invalidity in inter partes reviews. These reviews, carried out in the Patent Office, allow a challenger to seek to cancel a patent’s claims. The Supreme Court in Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC v. Lee, affirmed the USPTO practice of construing the claims using the “broadest reasonable interpretation” for the claims—a standard that makes invalidity more likely. The Court also confirmed that the decision to institute inter partes review is not subject to judicial review. Hovey Williams LLP prepared and filed the petition against Cuozzo on behalf of Garmin, the very first petition ever filed for inter partes review. Garmin did not participate in the Supreme Court review having settled previously with Cuozzo.

A copy of the decision can be found here: http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15pdf/15-446_ihdk.pdf