Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC v. Lee, U.S., No. 15-446, amicus brief filed 3/7/2016
File Downloads
All documents are in PDF format.
The Federal Circuit erred in endorsing the PTAB’s use of the broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) standard for claim construction in AIA trial proceedings, AIPLA argued to the Supreme Court in a March 7, 2016 amicus brief.
The BRI standard was specially crafted for examinational proceedings, not for the adjudicative proceedings created by the AIA. Congress intended those adjudicative proceedings to be an efficient alternative to district court trials, according to the brief, and they should follow the Phillips/Markman standard for claim construction used in district courts. The amicus brief also argued that the Federal Circuit incorrectly bars appellate consideration of issues raised in the PTAB final written decision when those issues were also addressed in the PTAB decision to institute the AIA trial. The Court’s misinterpretation of the bar on appeals at 35 U.S.C. §314(d) conflicts with the presumption of judicial review of executive branch actions.
The BRI standard was specially crafted for examinational proceedings, not for the adjudicative proceedings created by the AIA. Congress intended those adjudicative proceedings to be an efficient alternative to district court trials, according to the brief, and they should follow the Phillips/Markman standard for claim construction used in district courts. The amicus brief also argued that the Federal Circuit incorrectly bars appellate consideration of issues raised in the PTAB final written decision when those issues were also addressed in the PTAB decision to institute the AIA trial. The Court’s misinterpretation of the bar on appeals at 35 U.S.C. §314(d) conflicts with the presumption of judicial review of executive branch actions.