©2014. Published in Landslide, Vol. 7, No. 1, September/October 2014, by the American Bar Association. Reproduced with permission. All rights reserved. This information or any portion thereof may not be copied or disseminated in any form or by any means or stored in an electronic database or retrieval system without the express written consent of the American Bar Association or the copyright holder.
The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA) introduced inter partes review (IPR) procedures as an alternative way to challenge a patent’s validity.1 IPRs were designed to be quicker, more efficient, and less expensive than the previous inter partes reexamination (IPX) procedure and district court litigation, and thus are a particularly attractive tool to use against nonpracticing entities (NPEs) or so-called patent trolls. Although similar in some ways, IPR proceedings involve some interference or litigation-like aspects unavailable in IPX proceedings, including limited discovery and an oral hearing.
Premium Content For:
- Intellectual Property Law Section