• 3M Company v. Bay Materials, LLCInstitution denied
  PTAB · Jul 7, 2023 · IPR2023-00243 · APJ Grace Karaffa Obermann · IPR · Institution

  The Board denied institution under General Plastic because 3M filed a staggered second petition challenging the same claims without explaining its nearly five-month delay.

  RulingsInstitution decision

  • PTAB / AIA Trials › Discretionary denial › General Plastic (serial petitions)Institution denied general plasticInstitution denied

    “Factors 4 and 5 Petitioner makes no attempt to explain its nearly five-month delay between filing the Petition in IPR215 and filing the instant Petition. Prelim. Resp. 21. As Patent Owner points out, the Petition in IPR215 expressly states Petitioner’s intention to file the instant Petition. Id. at 8, 23; IPR215, Paper 2 at 3. Petitioner provides “no explanation of its decision to wait” nearly five months to carry out that intention. Prelim. Resp. 23. An inadequately explained delay of similar length supported denial of institution in Valve, even where a different petitioner filed the second petition. Id. 21– 22 (citing Valve, Paper 10 at 15). Both the length of the delay (factor 4) and Petitioner’s failure to explain the delay (factor 5) favor denying institution.” slip op. at 10

  Discretionary denial
  Patents in suitUS 10,870,263

Holdings, summaries, rulings, issues, outcomes, winners and claim constructions shown for a decision were generated by a large language model reading the opinion. They are a guide to the decision, not the decision. Confirm every one against the court's own text before relying on it. Outcomes read from the patent owner’s side. Party names are extracted from the decision and are missing on about 900 short Director denials and scans, which carry the trial number instead.