35 USC § 317 - Inter partes reexamination prohibited
(a)
In General.—
An inter partes review instituted under this chapter shall be terminated with respect to any petitioner upon the joint request of the petitioner and the patent owner, unless the Office has decided the merits of the proceeding before the request for termination is filed. If the inter partes review is terminated with respect to a petitioner under this section, no estoppel under section
315
(e) shall attach to the petitioner, or to the real party in interest or privy of the petitioner, on the basis of that petitioner’s institution of that inter partes review. If no petitioner remains in the inter partes review, the Office may terminate the review or proceed to a final written decision under section
318
(a).
(b)
Agreements in Writing.—
Any agreement or understanding between the patent owner and a petitioner, including any collateral agreements referred to in such agreement or understanding, made in connection with, or in contemplation of, the termination of an inter partes review under this section shall be in writing and a true copy of such agreement or understanding shall be filed in the Office before the termination of the inter partes review as between the parties. At the request of a party to the proceeding, the agreement or understanding shall be treated as business confidential information, shall be kept separate from the file of the involved patents, and shall be made available only to Federal Government agencies on written request, or to any person on a showing of good cause.
(a)
Order for Reexamination.—
Notwithstanding any provision of this chapter, once an order for inter partes reexamination of a patent has been issued under section
313, neither the third-party requester nor its privies,
[1]
may file a subsequent request for inter partes reexamination of the patent until an inter partes reexamination certificate is issued and published under section
316, unless authorized by the Director.
(b)
Final Decision.—
Once a final decision has been entered against a party in a civil action arising in whole or in part under section
1338 of title
28,
[1]
that the party has not sustained its burden of proving the invalidity of any patent claim in suit or if a final decision in an inter partes reexamination proceeding instituted by a third-party requester is favorable to the patentability of any original or proposed amended or new claim of the patent, then neither that party nor its privies may thereafter request an inter partes reexamination of any such patent claim on the basis of issues which that party or its privies raised or could have raised in such civil action or inter partes reexamination proceeding, and an inter partes reexamination requested by that party or its privies on the basis of such issues may not thereafter be maintained by the Office, notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter. This subsection does not prevent the assertion of invalidity based on newly discovered prior art unavailable to the third-party requester and the Patent and Trademark Office at the time of the inter partes reexamination proceedings.
[1] So in original. The comma probably should not appear.
Source
(Added Pub. L. 106–113, div. B, § 1000(a)(9) [title IV, § 4604(a)], Nov. 29, 1999, 113 Stat. 1536, 1501A–570; amended Pub. L. 107–273, div. C, title III, § 13202(a)(5), (c)(1),Nov. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 1901, 1902; Pub. L. 112–29, § 6(a),Sept. 16, 2011, 125 Stat. 303.)
Amendment of Section
Pub. L. 112–29, § 6(a), (c)(2),Sept. 16, 2011, 125 Stat. 303, 304, provided that, effective upon the expiration of the 1-year period beginning on Sept. 16, 2011, and applicable to any patent issued before, on, or after that effective date, with provisions for graduated implementation, this section is amended to read as follows: § 317. Settlement
(a) In General.—An inter partes review instituted under this chapter shall be terminated with respect to any petitioner upon the joint request of the petitioner and the patent owner, unless the Office has decided the merits of the proceeding before the request for termination is filed. If the inter partes review is terminated with respect to a petitioner under this section, no estoppel under section
315
(e) shall attach to the petitioner, or to the real party in interest or privy of the petitioner, on the basis of that petitioner’s institution of that inter partes review. If no petitioner remains in the inter partes review, the Office may terminate the review or proceed to a final written decision under section
318
(a).
(b) Agreements in Writing.—Any agreement or understanding between the patent owner and a petitioner, including any collateral agreements referred to in such agreement or understanding, made in connection with, or in contemplation of, the termination of an inter partes review under this section shall be in writing and a true copy of such agreement or understanding shall be filed in the Office before the termination of the inter partes review as between the parties. At the request of a party to the proceeding, the agreement or understanding shall be treated as business confidential information, shall be kept separate from the file of the involved patents, and shall be made available only to Federal Government agencies on written request, or to any person on a showing of good cause.
See 2011 Amendment note below.
Amendments
2011—Pub. L. 112–29amended section generally. Prior to amendment, section related to restriction on subsequent request for inter partes reexamination.
2002—Pub. L. 107–273, § 13202(c)(1), made technical correction to directory language of Pub. L. 106–113, which enacted this section.
Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 107–273, § 13202(a)(5)(A), substituted “third-party requester nor its privies” for “patent owner nor the third-party requester, if any, nor privies of either”.
Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 107–273, § 13202(a)(5)(B), struck out “United States Code,” after “title 28,”.
Effective Date of 2011 Amendment
Amendment by Pub. L. 112–29effective upon the expiration of the 1-year period beginning on Sept. 16, 2011, and applicable to any patent issued before, on, or after that effective date, with provisions for graduated implementation, see section 6(c)(2) ofPub. L. 112–29, set out as a note under section
311 of this title.
The table below lists the classification updates, since Jan. 3, 2012, for this section. Updates to a broader range of sections may be found at the update page for containing chapter, title, etc.
The most recent Classification Table update that we have noticed was Wednesday, May 29, 2013
An empty table indicates that we see no relevant changes listed in the classification tables. If you suspect that our system may be missing something, please double-check with the Office of the Law Revision Counsel.
| 35 USC | Description of Change | Session Year | Public Law | Statutes at Large |
|---|
LII has no control over and does not endorse any external Internet site that contains links to or references LII.