PTAB Average Time-To-Decision in IPRs May Surprise You

14 July 2015 PTAB Trial Insights Blog

This post was co-authored by Foley & Lardner Summer Associate Jonathan E. Robe.

Ever wonder how long it takes the PTAB to decide to institute trial?  Ever have someone ask how long it will take for the Board to issue its final written decision?

Of course, the maximum amount of time is fixed – 3 months to an institution decision and 12 months to a final decision.  But an analysis of 100 recent PTAB decisions reveals that the actual amount of time could be just 1 month and 9 months, respectively.

The data sets consisted of 100 IPR proceedings which reached a final decision on the merits through May 31, 2015.1

Time to Institution Decision

The first data set evaluated the amount of time from the patent owner’s preliminary response to the PTAB’s decision to institute trial.  Table 1 provides some summary statistics.

Table 1

 

Chart 1 is a frequency plot for the time interval between filing of the patent owner’s preliminary response and the issuance of an institution decision for this set.

Chart 1

 

Time to Final Decision

The second data set evaluated the time from the PTAB’s decision to institute until its final written decision.  For ease of calculation, it was assumed that each month of the year had exactly 30 days.  Thus, those proceedings in which the time interval between institution decision and final decision was 364 days are expressed in these results as 12.13 months.  Table 2 provides some summary statistics for this set.

Table 2

 

Chart 2 provides a frequency plot for this set.

Chart 2

 

Conclusion

Surprisingly, some institution decisions have come as swiftly as one month after the patent owner’s preliminary response and more than 10% of the institution decisions studied were issued by the 2 month mark.  As for the final written decisions, fully 16% were issued by 11 months from institution, with some coming just over 9 months from institution.

______________________________

1 The data was collected and the tables and charts were prepared by Foley Summer Associate Jonathan E. Robe.

This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.

Insights

A Review of Recent Whistleblower Developments
19 July 2019
Legal News: Whistleblower Developments
Blockchain: A Tool With a Future in Healthcare
18 July 2019
Health Care Law Today
Do You Know What IMMEX Stands For?
16 July 2019
Dashboard Insights
Does The U.S. Need STRONGER Patents?
16 July 2019
PTAB Trial Insights
Review of 2020 Medicare Changes for Telehealth
11 December 2019
Member Call
2019 NDI Executive Exchange
14-15 November 2019
Chicago, IL
MAGI’s Clinical Research Conference
29 October 2019
Las Vegas, NV
Association for Corporate Counsel Annual Meeting 2019
27-30 October 2019
Phoenix, AZ