Insights

  • Home
  • Insights
  • Director Denies Institution for Inconsistent Claim Constructions, PTAB Litigation Blog

Share

Director Denies Institution for Inconsistent Claim Constructions, PTAB Litigation Blog

October 2026 Blog

Visit the PTAB Litigation Blog

 

The USPTO designated as informative three recent Director decisions denying institution of IPR in response to inconsistent claim construction by petitioners in parallel litigation before the PTAB and district courts. These decisions, all relying on Tesla Inc. v. Intellectual Ventures II, LLC (IPR2025-00340), highlight increased scrutiny from the USPTO towards petitioners seen as trying to “game the system” by advancing contradictory claims before different tribunals. The most instructive of these decisions is Terumo BCT Inc. v. Haemonetics Corp. (IPR2025-01374 and related proceedings), which illustrates the full scope of consequences a petitioner may face for inconsistent constructions—even when the inconsistency involves claims not directly at issue in the IPR.

 

Read the full article at ptablitigationblog.com.

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 www.jonesday.com. 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.

Before sending, please note:

Information on www.jonesday.com is for general use and is not legal advice. The mailing of this email is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Anything that you send to anyone at our Firm will not be confidential or privileged unless we have agreed to represent you. If you send this email, you confirm that you have read and understand this notice.