Printed Publications

Printed Publications: Simply Existing Isn’t Enough, PTAB Litigation Blog

Visit the PTAB Litigation Blog.

When filing an IPR, petitioners should be careful not to take for granted one of the most fundamental aspects of challenging validity in this forum: Whether or not the relied upon references qualify as prior art.  Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 311, IPRs challenging patentability under either §§ 102 or 103 can only be based upon “prior art consisting of patents or printed publications.”  When petitioners rely on patents, establishing such references as prior art is straightforward.  When petitioners rely on printed publications, however, the Board must determine, at the institution stage, whether there is a “reasonable likelihood” that the alleged prior art reference(s) put forward by petitioners actually qualify as prior art.  Hulu, LLC v. Sound View Innovations, LLC, IPR2018-01039, Paper 29 at 13 (PTAB Dec. 20, 2019) (precedential) (“[A]t the institution stage, the petition must identify, with particularity, evidence sufficient to establish a reasonable likelihood that the reference was publicly accessible before the critical date of the challenged patent and therefore that there is a reasonable likelihood that it qualifies as a printed publication.”).

Read the full article at

Insights by Jones Day should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information purposes only and may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication or proceeding without the prior written consent of the Firm, to be given or withheld at our discretion. To request permission to reprint or reuse any of our Insights, please use our “Contact Us” form, which can be found on our website at This Insight is not intended to create, and neither publication nor receipt of it constitutes, an attorney-client relationship. The views set forth herein are the personal views of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Firm.