The Supreme Court Upholds the Constitutionality of IPRs and Strikes Down Partial Institutions
The Supreme Court ruled that inter partes review (IPR) proceedings conducted by the Patent Office do not violate the Constitution. IPRs are a popular mechanism for challenging the patentability of issued patents. Since their enactment in 2012, over 7,500 IPR petitions have been filed in the Patent Office. In Oil States Energy Services v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC, the Supreme Court held that IPRs do not violate Article III of the Constitution or the Seventh Amendment. In another decision relating to Patent Office trials, the Supreme Court struck down the USPTO’s practice of granting “partial institutions.” In an IPR, the PTAB assesses whether or not to institute trial on a claim-by-claim basis. In SAS Institute v. Iancu, the Supreme Court determined that when the Patent Office institutes an IPR, it must decide the patentability of all of the claims the petitioner has challenged, not merely the claims that were instituted.