Two recent federal district court decisions refused to admit rulings from IPR proceedings as evidence in patent infringement litigation:
1. In Interdigital Communications, Inc. v. Nokia Corp., Case No. 13-cv-00010-RGA (D. Del. Sept. 19, 2014), the Court held that because the Board’s decision not to institute an IPR was “made by lawyers who are not persons of ordinary skill in the art,” the decision was only marginally relevant and should be excluded under FRE 403.
2. Likewise, in Ultratec, Inc. et al. v. Sorenson Communications, Inc., No. 3:13-CV-00346 (W.D. Wisc. Oct. 8, 2014), the Court held that “because of the different standards, procedures and presumptions applicable to IPR proceedings, evidence concerning the proceedings is irrelevant and highly prejudicial to the jury’s determination of the validity of the patents.” The Court did, however, allow the accused infringer to use the Board’s findings, outside the presence of the jury, to rebut allegations of willfulness.
If you have questions or need more information, please contact firstname.lastname@example.org.