Supreme Court Upholds Broadest Reasonable Interpretation and No Review for Institution in PTAB Proceedings

June 20, 2016
Post by Blog Staff

The Supreme Court has issued its opinion in the case of In re Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC. In re Cuozzo initially began as an inter partes review (IPR) with the Patent Trial and Appeals Board (PTAB) where Garmin challenged the validity of Cuozzo's patent relating to an interface that uses GPS technology to display a vehicle's speed as well as the speed limit on the basis that Cuozzo's patent was obvious under 35 U.S.C. ยง 103(a).

During claim construction, the PTAB applied the broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) standard applied during prosecution, rather than applying the Phillips standard used in litigation, and determined that all of the challenged claims were obvious in light of the prior art. The Court determined that the PTAB may adopt the BRI standard based on its long-standing practice of doing so and Chevron deference. The Federal Circuit also found that decisions by the PTAB regarding whether or not to institute a proceeding are not subject to judicial review. Certiorari was granted by the Supreme Court, and the case was argued April 25, 2016 on the two issues addressed by the Federal Circuit.

The Supreme Court's decision confirms the Federal Circuit, holding that the USPTO's application of BRI is appropriate, and that the decision of the PTAB regarding whether or not to institute a proceeding was not reviewable.  This decision underscores two important issues that differentiate PTAB procedures such as IPR and post grant review that can have significant implications for both patent owners and defendants. 

The full decision can be found here.

Post Categories

Comments (0)
Post a Comment

Captcha Image
Return to the Filewrapper Blog

Search Posts


The attorneys of McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C. designed this blog as an informational and educational resource about intellectual property law for our clients, other attorneys, and the public as a whole. Our goal is to provide cutting-edge information about recent developments in intellectual property law, including relevant case law updates, proposed legislation, and intellectual property law in the news.


McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C. provides this blog for general informational purposes only. By using this blog, you agree that the information on this blog does not constitute legal or other professional advice and no attorney-client or other relationship is created between you and McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C. Do not consider this blog to be a substitute for obtaining legal advice from a qualified, licensed attorney. While we try to revise this blog on a regular basis, it may not reflect the most current legal developments. We consciously refrain from expressing opinions on this blog and instead, offer it as a form of information and education, however if there appears an expression of opinion, realize that those views are indicative of the individual and not of the firm as a whole.

Connect with MVS

Enter your name and email address to recieve the latest news and updates from us and our attorneys.

Subscribe to: MVS Newsletter

Subscribe to: Filewrapper® Blog Updates

  I have read and agree to the terms and conditions of McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C.