In Top Ten No. (3), Cuozzo Speed Technologies LLC v. Lee (Top Ten Patent Cases, attached), a subsidiary issue is raised in this challenge against the “broadest reasonable interpretation” rule for post-grant proceedings under theLeahy Smith America Invents Act.  Responsive to a government argument thatinter partes review and a challenge under the new procedures may be consolidated, it is apparent that this right is a sham in that the Government has not pointed to a single case of such consolidation.  Sham “Consolidated Proceedings”, a Second Issue, id. at pp. 9-10.  As explained in Top Ten Patent Cases, the sham policy plays itself out, for example, where one of the proceedings permits a particular challenge but the other does not, where double patenting is used as the prime example. Id.

CuozzoMarch3

Regards,
Hal