Synopsis challenged the PTO’s regulation that allows the PTAB to institute IPRs on all or some of the challenged claims and the PTO’s practice of issuing final decisions on fewer than all of the claims raised in a petition. The district court dismissed on the grounds that all appeals of IPRs should be heard by the Federal Circuit. This is the same issue that Synopsis raised in its companion appeal of the PTAB’s decision, which the Federal Circuit affirmed on the same day. Accordingly, nothing remains to be decided in this appeal, and it is therefore dismissed as being moot based on the companion case.
Judge Newman dissented on the grounds that the district court correctly dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and thus, having been dismissed, the case cannot be deemed moot.
Synopsys, Inc. v. Lee, Case No. 2015-1183 (February 10, 2016); Opinion by: Dyk, joined by Wallach; Dissenting opinion by Newman; Appealed From: United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Cacheris, J. Read the full opinion here.
