35 U.S.C. § 329
Appeal
A party dissatisfied with the final written decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board under section 328(a) may appeal the decision pursuant to sections 141 through 144. Any party to the post-grant review shall have the right to be a party to the appeal.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 2013–2023 · leading case: Versata Dev. Grp., Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306 (Fed. Cir. 2015).
Versata Dev. Grp., Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306 (Fed. Cir. 2015). “See 35 U.S.C. § 329 . Rather, this case is about whether Congress can, and did, preclude review of whether the Board rightfully under- took that review in the first place.”
Blue Calypso, LLC. v. Groupon, Inc., 815 F.3d 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2016). “Thus, because we have jurisdiction to review the Board’s final decisions in CBM reviews, see AIA § 18(a)(1); 35 U.S.C. § 329 , the AIA does not preclude us from reviewing the Board’s conclusion that the chal- lenged patent claims are “covered business methods” that lack any…”
Return Mail, Inc. v. United States Postal Serv., 868 F.3d 1350 (Fed. Cir. 2017). “35 U.S.C. § 329 . But the statute also includes a “No Appeal” provision, 35 U.”
Unwired Planet, LLC v. Google Inc., 841 F.3d 1376 (Fed. Cir. 2016). “*1379 § 1295(a)(4)(A) and 35 U.S.C. § 329 . Our jurisdiction includes review of whether the '752 patent is a CBM patent.”
Secure Axcess, LLC v. Pnc Bank Nat'l Ass'n, 848 F.3d 1370 (Fed. Cir. 2017). “See 35 U.S.C. §§ 329 , 141–44; Versa- ta, 793 F.”
Versata Dev. Corp. v. Rea, 959 F. Supp. 2d 912 (E.D. Va. 2013). “”); 35 U.S.C. § 329 (“A party dissatisfied with the final written decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board under section 328(a) may appeal the decision pursuant to sections 141 through 144.”
Sightsound Tech., LLC v. Apple Inc., 809 F.3d 1307 (Fed. Cir. 2015). “§ 1295 (a)(4)(A) and 35 U.S.C. § 329 . Disoussion I We first address the question of jurisdiction.”
Cxloyalty, Inc. v. Maritz Holdings Inc., 986 F.3d 1367 (Fed. Cir. 2021). “§ 1295 (a)(4)(A) and 35 U.S.C. § 329 . DISCUSSION On appeal, cxLoyalty challenges the Board’s determi- nation that substitute claims 16–23 are patent eligible un- der § 101.”
Apple Inc. v. Qualcomm Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2021). “Ignoring this continuing controversy, my colleagues on this panel hold that Apple has no standing to appeal these PTAB decisions, despite the statutory authorization for ap- peal to the Federal Circuit, 35 U.”
OV Loop, Inc. v. MasterCard Inc. (S.D.N.Y. 2023). “) The parties may appeal the PTAB’s decision to the Federal Circuit, see 35 U.S.C. § 329 , which would likely take an additional one to two years to resolve the appeal, see Novartis, 582 F.”
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.