On April 23, 2025, the Federal Circuit reversed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board's (PTAB) determination that Qualcomm's U.S. Patent No. 8,063,674 was unpatentable. Apple's challenge relied on admitted prior art, which Qualcomm argued should not be permissible under 35 U.S.C. § 311(b). The court found that the interpretation of 'prior art' had been incorrect and remanded for further analysis of whether AAPA improperly formed the basis of Apple's IPR challenge. This ruling clarified the usage of admissions from patents in IPR proceedings, which was further supported by USPTO's updated guidance.
The Federal Circuit reversed the Board's finding and clarified the limitations of AAPA in the context of IPR petitions under Section 311(b).
Qualcomm argued that Appleâs reliance on AAPA violated Section 311(b), asserting only prior art consisting of patents or printed publications should be considered.
The Court's decision not only focused on the admissibility of the AAPA but also remanded for further consideration on whether it improperly formed the basis of Apple's challenge.
The USPTO's updated guidance reflects a clear framework regarding statements in patents used as prior art in IPRs, emphasizing careful adherence to statutory requirements.
Collection
[
|
...
]