§326 — Title 35 Patents | U.S. Code

Summary

The Director must write rules for how post-grant reviews work. The rules must make case files public (but let filings stay sealed while a sealing request is decided), say what grounds are enough to start a review, allow extra evidence after a petition, set how the review fits with other patent actions, limit discovery to evidence tied to the parties’ factual claims, and allow penalties for misuse that harasses or delays. The rules must protect confidential information, let the patent owner file a response with any affidavits or expert support, allow the owner to move to cancel claims or propose a reasonable number of substitute claims (and make amendment materials part of the public record), give either side a chance for an oral hearing, require a final decision within 1 year (but allow up to a 6-month extension for good cause), and give the petitioner at least 1 chance to file written comments. The Director must consider effects on the economy, the patent system’s integrity, and the Office’s ability to finish reviews on time. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board will run each post-grant review. The petitioner must prove unpatentability by a preponderance of the evidence.

Title 35, §326

Patents — Source: USLM XML via OLRC

(a)The Director shall prescribe regulations—

(1)providing that the file of any proceeding under this chapter shall be made available to the public, except that any petition or document filed with the intent that it be sealed shall, if accompanied by a motion to seal, be treated as sealed pending the outcome of the ruling on the motion;

(2)setting forth the standards for the showing of sufficient grounds to institute a review under subsections (a) and (b) of section 324;

(3)establishing procedures for the submission of supplemental information after the petition is filed;

(4)establishing and governing a post-grant review under this chapter and the relationship of such review to other proceedings under this title;

(5)setting forth standards and procedures for discovery of relevant evidence, including that such discovery shall be limited to evidence directly related to factual assertions advanced by either party in the proceeding;

(6)prescribing sanctions for abuse of discovery, abuse of process, or any other improper use of the proceeding, such as to harass or to cause unnecessary delay or an unnecessary increase in the cost of the proceeding;

(7)providing for protective orders governing the exchange and submission of confidential information;

(8)providing for the filing by the patent owner of a response to the petition under section 323 after a post-grant review has been instituted, and requiring that the patent owner file with such response, through affidavits or declarations, any additional factual evidence and expert opinions on which the patent owner relies in support of the response;

(9)setting forth standards and procedures for allowing the patent owner to move to amend the patent under subsection (d) to cancel a challenged claim or propose a reasonable number of substitute claims, and ensuring that any information submitted by the patent owner in support of any amendment entered under subsection (d) is made available to the public as part of the prosecution history of the patent;

(10)providing either party with the right to an oral hearing as part of the proceeding;

(11)requiring that the final determination in any post-grant review be issued not later than 1 year after the date on which the Director notices the institution of a proceeding under this chapter, except that the Director may, for good cause shown, extend the 1-year period by not more than 6 months, and may adjust the time periods in this paragraph in the case of joinder under section 325(c); and

(12)providing the petitioner with at least 1 opportunity to file written comments within a time period established by the Director.

(b)In prescribing regulations under this section, the Director shall consider the effect of any such regulation on the economy, the integrity of the patent system, the efficient administration of the Office, and the ability of the Office to timely complete proceedings instituted under this chapter.

(c)The Patent Trial and Appeal Board shall, in accordance with section 6, conduct each post-grant review instituted under this chapter.

(d)(1)During a post-grant review instituted under this chapter, the patent owner may file 1 motion to amend the patent in 1 or more of the following ways:

(A)Cancel any challenged patent claim.

(B)For each challenged claim, propose a reasonable number of substitute claims.

(2)Additional motions to amend may be permitted upon the joint request of the petitioner and the patent owner to materially advance the settlement of a proceeding under section 327, or upon the request of the patent owner for good cause shown.

(3)An amendment under this subsection may not enlarge the scope of the claims of the patent or introduce new matter.

(e)In a post-grant review instituted under this chapter, the petitioner shall have the burden of proving a proposition of unpatentability by a preponderance of the evidence.

Notes & Related Subsidiaries

Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries

Effective Date

Section effective upon the expiration of the 1-year period beginning Sept. 16, 2011, and applicable only to patents described in section 3(n)(1) of Pub. L. 112–29 (35 U.S.C. 100 note), with certain exceptions and limitations, see section 6(f)(2), (3) of Pub. L. 112–29, set out as a note under section 321 of this title.

§326 Conduct of post-grant review

Summary

Title 35, §326

Notes & Related Subsidiaries

Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries

Effective Date

Citations & Metadata