Access practice tools, as well as industry leading news, customizable alerts, dockets, and primary content, including a comprehensive collection of case law, dockets, and regulations. Leverage...
By Tony Dutra
RPX Corp., which boasts a high success rate challenging patents at the patent office, can’t appeal an unsuccessful challenge, a federal appeals court held Jan. 17.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit rejected RPX’s argument that it had standing because a loss at the Patent and Trademark Office is an injury to its reputation. Before losing its challenge to ChanBond LLC’s telecommunications patent, RPX claimed a 95 percent success rate in getting the PTAB to institute trial and a 100 percent rate of success in trial.
The court held in 2014 that advocacy associations generally lack standing to appeal PTAB losses. The current ruling extends that deficiency to companies like RPX, known as “non-defendent filers” of PTAB petitions.
San Francisco-based RPX is a member organization for companies at risk of being sued for patent infringement. RPX established its program challenging patent validity at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board after the America Invents Act of 2011 (AIA) established the inter partes review (IPR) procedure.
The AIA allows both alleged infringers and non-defendant parties to file IPR petitions. A losing party can appeal to the Federal Circuit under 35 U.S.C. §319, but it must have standing in the federal court system, which requires showing that it suffered an injury.
The court held in 2014 in Consumer Watchdog v. Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation that the advocacy group lacked standing to appeal its unsuccessful challenge to a stem cell patent via the inter partes reexamination procedure. IPRs replaced inter partes reexaminations. The court affirmed that IPRs would be treated the same in Phigenix, Inc. v. Immunogen, Inc. The court ruled that an appellant couldn’t claim injury simply based on its statutory rights under Section 319.
RPX argued that the loss was a competitive injury. RPX competes with other groups offering IPR challenge programs— Unified Patents Inc. and Askeladden LLC —for members. The lack of standing didn’t specifically create a disadvantage for RPX versus its competitors, the court said.
RPX didn’t immediately respond to Bloomberg Law’s request for comment on the court’s ruling. A spokesman for Askeladden said the organization had no comment.
“While this particular standing challenge was successful, it is non-precedential, the law of standing is complex, and there are many varied ways to prove concrete and particularized injury-in-fact that the court has yet to address,” said Jonathan Stroud, Unified’s chief patent counsel. “We look forward to seeing how this complex and ever-changing area of the law develops at the Federal Circuit in the wake of the groundbreaking Phigenix case.
The Federal Circuit’s decisions only apply to non-defendant parties who fail at the PTAB. When the non-defendant party wins at the PTAB, the court will allow that challenger to participate in the patent owner’s appeal, defending the PTAB’s decision, per Personal Audio, LLC v. Electronic Frontier Foundation.
Judge Richard Linn wrote the court’s opinion, which was joined by Judges Jimmie V. Reyna and Todd M. Hughes.
Pierce Atwood LLP and Klarquist Sparkman LLP represented RPX. Mishcon de Reya New York LLP represented ChanBond.
The case is RPX Corp. v. ChanBond LLC , Fed. Cir., No. 2017-2346, unpublished 1/17/18 .
To contact the reporter on this story: Tony Dutra in Washington at email@example.com
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Mike Wilczek at firstname.lastname@example.org
Copyright © 2018 The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
All Bloomberg BNA treatises are available on standing order, which ensures you will always receive the most current edition of the book or supplement of the title you have ordered from Bloomberg BNA’s book division. As soon as a new supplement or edition is published (usually annually) for a title you’ve previously purchased and requested to be placed on standing order, we’ll ship it to you to review for 30 days without any obligation. During this period, you can either (a) honor the invoice and receive a 5% discount (in addition to any other discounts you may qualify for) off the then-current price of the update, plus shipping and handling or (b) return the book(s), in which case, your invoice will be cancelled upon receipt of the book(s). Call us for a prepaid UPS label for your return. It’s as simple and easy as that. Most importantly, standing orders mean you will never have to worry about the timeliness of the information you’re relying on. And, you may discontinue standing orders at any time by contacting us at 1.800.960.1220 or by sending an email to email@example.com.
Put me on standing order at a 5% discount off list price of all future updates, in addition to any other discounts I may quality for. (Returnable within 30 days.)
Notify me when updates are available (No standing order will be created).
This Bloomberg BNA report is available on standing order, which ensures you will all receive the latest edition. This report is updated annually and we will send you the latest edition once it has been published. By signing up for standing order you will never have to worry about the timeliness of the information you need. And, you may discontinue standing orders at any time by contacting us at 1.800.372.1033, option 5, or by sending us an email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Put me on standing order
Notify me when new releases are available (no standing order will be created)