The Patent Trial and Appeal Board has designated five additional AIA opinions as precedential, bringing the total count to eight. The PTAB’s “Decisions” page links to a spreadsheet listing each opinion and why the opinion has been designated precedential, as well as a page with links to each of the precedential opinions.
The following opinions are precedential (along with the PTAB’s notes of why they are precedential):
- Garmin Int'l, Inc. v. Cuozzo Speed Techs LLC (IPR2012-00001) – “factors to consider in granting additional discovery in IPR proceeding.”
- Bloomberg Inc. v. Markets-Alert Pty Ltd. (CBM2013-00005) – “factors to consider in granting additional discovery in CBM proceeding.”
- Oracle Corp. v. Click-to-Call Techs. LP (IPR2013-00312) – “Statutory Interpretation of 35 U.S.C. § 315(b) (‘served with a complaint’)” (only section III.A is precedential).
- MasterImage 3D, Inc. v. RealD Inc. (IPR2015-00040) – “burden on Patent Owner in supporting a motion to amend claims.”
- Lumentum Holdings, Inc. v. Capella Photonics, Inc. (IPR2015-00739) – “Statutory Interpretation of 35 U.S.C. § 312(a)(2).”
- LG Elecs., Inc. V. Mondis Tech Ltd. (IPR2015-00937) – “Statutory Interpretation of 35 U.S.C. § 315(b) (‘served with a complaint’).”
- Westlake Servs., LLC v. Credit Acceptance Corp. (CBM2014-00176) – “Statutory Interpretation of 35 U.S.C. §§ 315(e)(1), 328(a).”
- SecureBuy, LLC v. CardinalCommerce Corp. (CBM2014-00035) – “35 U.S.C. § 325(d).”