Bio/pharma IPRs by the numbers

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

Bio/pharma IPRs by the numbers

Figures discussed at the BIO International Convention reveal that bio/pharma IPRs at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board have a lower institution rate and lower claim-cancellation rate than for all IPRs

According to the USPTO’s latest statistics, there have been 108 PTAB petitions filed in the TC 1600 class covering bio/pharma patents. This is 8.1% of all petitions filed.

At the BIO International Convention, the USPTO’s Jackie Wright Bonilla provided further detail on how the TC 1600 class stacks up to others.

She revealed the TC 1600 class has a 64% institution rate for inter partes review (IPR) petitions. This is lower than the 76% institution rate for all IPRs.

The rate of claims being cancelled by the Board in pharma IPRs is also below the average. The TC 1600 class has had 28 final written decisions. In these, 75.5% of instituted claims were cancelled (309 claims cancelled and 100 claims found patentable) and 71.7% of challenged claims were cancelled.

In comparison, in the 323 final written decisions in all IPRs 82.5% of instituted claims have been cancelled and 75.3% of challenged claims have been cancelled.

In the same session, Sterne Kessler’s Eric Steffe gave an overview of PTAB cases that have been appealed to the Federal Circuit. He said 141 appeals from final IPR/CBM decisions were docketed at the Federal Circuit. Of these, 104 (75%) are by patent owners, 18 (13%) are by petitioners and 19 (12%) are cross appeals by both parties,

Nine percent of the appeals are from the biotech/chemistry area, with 13 appeals. Nine of these are by patent owners and four are by petitioners, which Steffe said is “roughly mirroring other technologies in terms of who is making those appeals”.



more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

VO, which has offices in the Netherlands, Belgium and Germany, is the second European IP firm to secure external backing this week
The Bardehle Pagenberg attorneys-at-law discuss the firm’s Managing IP EMEA Awards 2026 success, Unified Patent Court litigation strategy, and evolving European patent trends
A patent battle between two legal tech companies and a loss for Elon Musk’s xAI against OpenAI were also among the top talking points
With drug prices a hot topic in the US, courts are seemingly more reluctant to prevent the entry of generics to the market
Academic Eden Sarid joins us during Pride Month to discuss queer expression and IP law, Patagonia v Pattie Gonia, and how queer and AI-generated creations both pose novelty concerns
Patent attorney Michael Henson joins the firm to lead its freshly launched blockchain and digital assets practice
A dispute over mammogram technology, and a development in the case between GSK and Moderna were also among the top talking points in recent weeks
With rankings for Western Europe set to be published on June 25, we sat down with our research lead to find out what practitioners and law firms can expect
Peter O’Sullivan, a professional services executive, says he is looking forward to helping Pearce IP become the leading life sciences firm in Australia and New Zealand
Matteo Di Lernia, advocate at LCA Studio Legale, unpicks the CJEU’s ruling in M.M. Ristorazione v Villa Ramazzini, including its impact on litigation strategies
Gift this article