Last-minute submissions push PTAB comments total to 37

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Last-minute submissions push PTAB comments total to 37

ptab-web-icon.jpg

After 22 comments were submitted in the three days before the deadline for comments about Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) proceedings, the USPTO has received feedback from a total of 37 companies, organisations and individuals

uspto.jpg

The USPTO published a request for comments in the Federal Register on June 27 this year, seeking public comment on all aspects of the new administrative trial proceeding rules and trial practice guide. The USPTO had originally given a deadline for written comments of September 16 but pushed it back a month to allow additional time to submit comments.

Thirty-seven comments were received in total. Among those submitting comments during the week before the deadline were ABA-IPL, the American Intellectual Property Law Association, Cisco, Google and Oracle, Electronic Frontier Foundation, Innovation Alliance, Pfizer, PhRMA, Samsung and Unified Patents.

The USPTO outlined 17 questions for consideration including issues such as the claims construction standard, motions to amend, patent owner preliminary responses, obviousness, real party in interest, discovery, multiple proceedings, extension of the one-year period to issue a final determination, and the use of live testimony.

The USPTO is expected to make changes to PTAB proceedings after it taken on board all of the comments. Patent owners have raised concerns about the limited discovery and inability to amend claims under the proceedings in particular.

David Kappos, former USPTO director and partner at Cravath Swaine & Moore, told Managing IP in August: “I am 100% confident they will make some changes from what they learn from the input they are getting. I wouldn’t be surprised if some adjustments are made in the area of permitting claim amendment and discovery.”

You can keep up with all of Managing IP’s PTAB coverage at www.managingip.com/ptab

The full list of comments received by the USPTO is:

· ABA-IPL Section (October 16)

· AIPLA (October 16)

· Capital Legal Group, PLLC (October 15)

· Cisco Systems, Dell Inc., Google, Inc,, Oracle Corporation, et al (October 16)

· Digimarc Corporation (October 16)

· Dufresne, Andrew (October 16)

· Electronic Frontier Foundation (October 16)

· EMC Corp. and Adobe System Inc. (October 16)

· Espinoza, Gilberto et al (October 16)

· GEA Process Engineering, Inc. (September 16)

· Hospira, Inc. (September 16)

· Houston Intellectual Property Law Association (September 16)

· IBM Corporation (September 19)

· Innovation Alliance (October 16)

· The Internet Association (October 16)

· Intellectual Property Owners Association (September 16)

· Japan Intellectual Property Association (September 16)

· Keefe, Heidi (September 16)

· McKee, Christopher (September 12)

· McLeod, Rick (October 16)

· MIPLA IP Law (October 16)

· Morsa, Steve (October 14)

· Neifeld, Rick (October 16)

· New York Intellectual Property Law Association (September 16)

· Nugen, Fred (August 21)

· Pfizer, Inc. (October 16)

· PhRMA (October 16)

· Public Knowledge (September 30)

· Quillin, George et al (October 16)

· Samsung Electronics, Co. Ltd (October 16)

· SAS (August 20)

· Smith-Pederson (October 8)

· Staff1@piausa.org (September 25)

· Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein, & Fox, PLLC (October 16)

· Think Computer Corporation (September 12)

· Unified Patents (October 16)

· Williams, Andrew et al (October 16)

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

As global commerce continues to expand through e-commerce platforms and digital marketplaces, protecting brands has become a growing challenge for organisations worldwide. Counterfeiting, intellectual property infringement, and online brand abuse are increasing across industries, making brand protection strategies a critical priority for businesses.
Henrik Holzapfel and Chuck Larsen of McDermott Will & Schulte explain why a Court of Appeal ruling could promote access to justice and present a growth opportunity for litigation finance
A co-partner in charge says the UK prosecution teams are a ‘vital’ part of the firm’s offering, while praising a key injunction win
A team from White & Case has checked in on behalf of Premier Inn Hotels in a UK trademark and passing off case against a cookie brand
Litigation team says pre-trial work and a Section 101 defence helped significantly limit damages payable by ride-sharing firm Lyft in patent case
News of Avanci hiring a senior vice president and the EPO teaming up with a French AI startup were also among the top talking points
Explosm, the independent Texas studio behind the hit webcomic Cyanide & Happiness, partnered with Temu’s IP protection team to combat counterfeiters infringing on its brand
The latest in a dispute over juicing machines, and a shakeup in judicial compositions were also among the top developments
Patent partner Robert Hollingshead explains why the firm remains committed to Japan despite several US firms exiting the Japanese and greater Asia market
Emma Green, partner at Bird & Bird, shares why the Iceland v Iceland dispute could prompt businesses and lawyers to think differently about brand enforcement
Gift this article