Door Closed On Petitioner Who Failed To Prove Analogous Art, PTAB Litigation Blog

Visit the PTAB Litigation Blog

A PTAB panel recently denied IPR institution where one of the asserted prior art references was non-analogous and thus the POSITA would not have made the proposed § 103 combination.  The Chamberlain Group, LLC v. Overhead Door Corp., IPR2022-00842, Paper 9 at 37 (PTAB Oct. 25, 2022) (“Decision”).  Petitioner alleged that several claims of U.S. Patent No. 9,869,120—directed to the pairing of wireless transmitters for garage doors—were obvious over Fitzgibbon (U.S. 5,751,224) and Romine (U.S. 8,639,240).  Fitzgibbon related to garage door systems that received encrypted radio frequency transmissions to identify an authorized user.  Id. at 11.  Romine, however, related to wirelessly programming devices during manufacture, “regardless of technology.”  Id. at 14-15.  Petitioner alleged that it would have been obvious to use Romine’s controller to wirelessly transmit authorization codes to Fitzgibbon’s garage door opener (id. at 32), but failed to address how Romine was analogous art eligible for the obviousness analysis (id. at 37).

Read the full article at

Jones Day publications 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 reprint permission for any of our publications, please use our “Contact Us” form, which can be found on our website at The mailing of this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, 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.