C.F.R. » Title 37 » CHAPTER I—UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE › SUBCHAPTER A—GENERAL › PART 90—JUDICIAL REVIEW OF PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD DECISIONS

37 C.F.R. § 90.3

Time for appeal or civil action

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Filing deadline. (1) For an appeal under 35 U.S.C. 141. The notice of appeal filed pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 142 must be filed with the Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office no later than sixty-three (63) days after the date of the final Board decision. Any notice of cross-appeal is controlled by Rule 4(a)(3) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, and any other requirement imposed by the Rules of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

(2) For a notice of election under 35 U.S.C. 141(d). The time for filing a notice of election under 35 U.S.C. 141(d) is governed by 35 U.S.C. 141(d).

(3) For a civil action under 35 U.S.C. 145 or 146. (i) A civil action must be commenced no later than sixty-three (63) days after the date of the final Board decision.

(ii) The time for commencing a civil action pursuant to a notice of election under 35 U.S.C. 141(d) is governed by 35 U.S.C. 141(d).

(b) Time computation. (1) Rehearing. A timely request for rehearing will reset the time for appeal or civil action to no later than sixty-three (63) days after action on the request. Any subsequent request for rehearing from the same party in the same proceeding will not reset the time for seeking judicial review, unless the additional request is permitted by order of the Board.

(2) Holidays. If the last day for filing an appeal or civil action falls on a Federal holiday in the District of Columbia, the time is extended pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 21(b).

(c) Extension of time. (1) The Director, or the Director's designee, may extend the time for filing an appeal, or commencing a civil action, upon written request if:

(i) Requested before the expiration of the period for filing an appeal or commencing a civil action, and upon a showing of good cause; or

(ii) Requested after the expiration of the period for filing an appeal of commencing a civil action, and upon a showing that the failure to act was the result of excusable neglect.

(2) The request must be filed with the Director by electronic mail to the email address indicated on the United States Patent and Trademark Office's web page for the Office of the General Counsel. This electronically submitted request will be accorded a receipt date, which is the date in Eastern Time when the correspondence is received in the Office, regardless of whether that date is a Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday within the District of Columbia. If there is some circumstance in which electronic mail cannot be used, submission may be by Priority Mail Express® to the Office of the Solicitor, United States Patent and Trademark Office, Mail Stop 8, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450.

[77 FR 48677, Aug. 14, 2012, as amended at 89 FR 22086, Mar. 29, 2024]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 23 cases (15 in the last 5 years), 2018–2025 · leading case: Odyssey Logistics and Tech. v. Iancu
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Odyssey Logistics and Tech. v. Iancu (2020) cafc · cites it 2× “See 37 C.F.R. § 90.3 (b)(1) (explaining that the appli- cant’s time to challenge a Board decision in an appeal or civil action starts anew after the Board’s action on rehear- ing); cf.”
alarm.com Incorporated v. Hirshfeld (2022) cafc · cites it 3× “§ 306; §§ 134(b), 141(b); 37 C.F.R. § 90.3 (a). One other provision is central to the issue presented to us—one of the two estoppel provisions of the IPR scheme set out in chapter 31 of Title 35, U.”
Google LLC v. Hammond Development International, Inc. (2022) cafc “37 C.F.R. § 90.3 . Google appeals the Board’s determination that claims 14–19 of the ’816 patent are not unpatentable.”
BTG Int'l Ltd. v. Amneal Pharm. LLC (2018) njd “See 37 C.F.R. 90.3(b)(1) (deadline to appeal runs from PTAB's action on request for rehearing).”
Palomar Techs., Inc. v. Mrsi Sys., LLC (2019) dcd “§§ 142 , 319 ; 37 C.F.R. § 90.3 ; Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B)(ii).”
Axonics, Inc. v. Medtronic, Inc. (2023) cafc “§ 142 and 37 C.F.R. § 90.3 (a)(1). We have juris- diction under 35 U.”
alarm.com Incorporated v. Hirshfeld (2022) cafc · cites it 3× “§ 306; §§ 134(b), 141(b); 37 C.F.R. § 90.3 (a). One other provision is central to the issue presented to us—one of the two estoppel provisions of the IPR scheme set out in chapter 31 of Title 35, U.”
Bell Semiconductor LLC v. Advanced Semiconductor Engineering, Inc. (2023) cafc · cites it 2× “§ 142 and 37 C.F.R. § 90.3 (a)(1). Bell principally challenges the Board’s claim construction.”
Guymon v. Vidal (2025) vaed · cites it 2× “Plaintiff also argues that pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 90.3 (c)(1), he should receive an extension of time based on excusable neglect.”
IBM v. Zillow Group, Inc. (2025) cafc · cites it 2× “80; 37 C.F.R. § 90.3 (a)(1) (“The notice of appeal filed pursuant to 35 U.”
Arunachalam v. IBM (2019) cafc “37 C.F.R. § 90.3 (a). But Dr. Arunacha- lam never filed an appeal.”
Mayo Foundation v. Iancu (2019) cafc “§ 142 ; 37 C.F.R. § 90.3 . Following termination of the interference, the Board returned the ’310 application to the examiner.”
Show all 23 citing cases →
— 37 C.F.R. § 90.3(b)(1) — 1 case
BTG Int'l Ltd. v. Amneal Pharm. LLC (2018) njd “See 37 C.F.R. 90.3(b)(1) (deadline to appeal runs from PTAB's action on request for rehearing).”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.