{"id":189,"date":"2015-04-10T21:55:50","date_gmt":"2015-04-11T01:55:50","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/?p=189"},"modified":"2015-04-12T22:40:57","modified_gmt":"2015-04-13T02:40:57","slug":"ptos-refusal-to-terminate-inter-partes-reexamination-after-litigation-settled-not-reviewable","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/?p=189","title":{"rendered":"PTO&#8217;s refusal to Terminate Inter Partes Reexamination After Litigation Settled Not Reviewable"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>In <em>Automated Merchandising\u00a0v. Lee<\/em>, 2014-1728\u00a0(April 10, 2015), the Federal Circuit\u00a0held that\u00a0AMS\u2019s challenge to the PTO\u2019s refusal to terminate pending reexaminations cannot proceed because the refusal is not a \u201cfinal agency action\u201d under the APA, 5 U.S.C. \u00a7 704.<\/p>\n<p align=\"LEFT\">AMS sued Crane in for infringement of four patents (U.S. Patent Nos. 6,384,402, 6,794,634, 7,191,915, and 7,343,220).\u00a0Crane requested\u00a0<em>inter partes<\/em> reexamination of\u00a0the patents.\u00a0 AMS and Crane settled their suit, with the court issuing a consent judgment\u00a0that \u201c[t]he parties stipulate that [the four patents] are valid.\u201d AMS then asked\u00a0the USPTO to terminate the reexamination, but the USPTO refused.\u00a0 AMS brought an action in district court, challenging the USPTO&#8217;s refusal under the APA.\u00a0 The district court rejected the challenge on the merits, but the Federal Circuit found that the USPTO&#8217;s decision was not a final decision that could be challenged under the APA.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>In Automated Merchandising\u00a0v. Lee, 2014-1728\u00a0(April 10, 2015), the Federal Circuit\u00a0held that\u00a0AMS\u2019s challenge to the PTO\u2019s refusal to terminate pending reexaminations cannot proceed because the refusal is not a \u201cfinal agency action\u201d under the APA, 5 U.S.C. \u00a7 704. AMS sued &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/?p=189\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-189","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"post_mailing_queue_ids":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/189","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=189"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/189\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":190,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/189\/revisions\/190"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=189"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=189"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=189"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}