Log in
E-mail
Password
Show password
Remember
Forgot password ?
Become a member for free
Sign up
Sign up
New member
Sign up for FREE
New customer
Discover our services
Settings
Settings
Dynamic quotes 
OFFON

CISCO SYSTEMS, INC.

(CSCO)
  Report
SummaryQuotesChartsNewsRatingsCalendarCompanyFinancialsConsensusRevisions 
SummaryMost relevantAll NewsAnalyst Reco.Other languagesPress ReleasesOfficial PublicationsSector newsMarketScreener Strategies

Discretion Retained: USPTO Dodges Attack From Big Tech To Rein In Discretionary IPR Denials

11/23/2021 | 11:31pm EST

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)  recently thwarted an attempt by big tech companies such as Apple, Cisco, Google, and Intel, to rid themselves of discretionary denials under the Fintiv factors. While these companies will almost assuredly seek other avenues to dismantle such discretionary denials, last week's developments are a win for patent owners in the short term.  On November 10, 2021, Northern District of California Judge Edward J. Davila dismissed a suit challenging the application of the NHK-Fintiv factors, finding that Supreme Court precedent prevents their challenge under 35 U.S.C. § 314(d), stating that decisions to institute inter partes reviews (IPRs) are "final and nonappealable."

The IPR process allows parties to challenge the validity of patents at the USPTO's Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).  IPRs are popular with companies accused of infringing patents and are used as tools to invalidate patents, often while fighting infringement claims.

However, these companies have been irked by rejections of IPRs due to the agency's NHK-Fintiv  rule.  This rule, created in two precedential decisions, identifies a six-factor "holistic" test used by the PTAB to decide when to deny petitions based on the advanced stage of parallel proceedings (among other things).  The USPTO states this policy is necessary to preserve their limited resources, especially when another forum may resolve validity first.  Precedential decisions are binding on PTAB judges.

In August 2020, Apple, Google, Cisco, Intel, and others sued, alleging the NHK-Fintiv rule's "vague factors lead to speculative, unpredictable, and unfair outcomes."  These critics claim the policy undermines the role of IPRs in protecting a strong patent system by drastically reducing the availability of IPRs.

The USPTO moved to dismiss.  Citing Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC v. Lee, 579 U.S. 261 (2016) and Thryv, Inc. v. Click-To-Call Technologies, 140 S. Ct. 1367 (2020), Judge Davila found that under § 314(d) of the America Invents Act (AIA), only constitutional challenges and jurisdictional violations related to institution decisions may be appealed.  Plaintiffs' suit did not fit those categories.  More to the point, Judge Davila found that an analysis into the lawfulness of the NHK-Fintiv  rule would require one to address questions closely tied to IPR institution decisions—which Cuozzo forbids.  Judge Davila held that he could not "deduce a principled reason" why that precedent "would not extend to the Director's determination that parallel litigation is a factor in denying IPR."

While it is unclear if the tech companies involved will appeal this particular decision, their attacks on the NHK-Fintiv factors are likely far from over. Congress is also considering legislation that could eliminate most of the USPTO director's discretion to deny IPRs.  Finally, where USPTO director nominee, Kathi Vidal, stands on discretionary denials may play an even more important role in this fight. In short, the fight over PTAB discretionary denials, and the PTAB generally, is far from over.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mr Michael McNamara
Mintz
One Financial Center
Boston
MA 02111
UNITED STATES
Tel: 6175426000
Fax: 6175422241
E-mail: www.mintz.com
URL: www.mintz.com

© Mondaq Ltd, 2021 - Tel. +44 (0)20 8544 8300 - http://www.mondaq.com, source Business Briefing

All news about CISCO SYSTEMS, INC.
08:15aCISCO : Why I Joined and Rejoined Cisco
PU
08:15aCISCO : Meet Mark from Cisco's customer advocacy community
PU
01/14CISCO : The time to transform manufacturing was yesterday, and sustainability has a NEW me..
PU
01/14CISCO : There is no substitute for a CISO…or is there?
PU
01/14Customer Relationships With Cisco Are Complicated And Evolving (Podcast)
AQ
01/13CISCO : Attaining Business Resiliency with Cisco Nexus Dashboard Insights
PU
01/13Microsoft Top Cloud Vendor While IBM, Dell Lead Hardware Firms Amid Strong IT Spend Out..
MT
01/13CISCO : Ignite your Sales and Accelerate Business Outcomes with Ready-to-Sell Solutions
PU
01/13CISCO : Getting To Know ThousandEyes – Part 2
PU
01/13SUSTAINABILITY IMPACT IN FINANCIAL S : Improvements to Four Areas
PU
More news
Analyst Recommendations on CISCO SYSTEMS, INC.
More recommendations
Financials (USD)
Sales 2022 52 740 M - -
Net income 2022 12 226 M - -
Net cash 2022 18 811 M - -
P/E ratio 2022 21,2x
Yield 2022 2,46%
Capitalization 259 B 259 B -
EV / Sales 2022 4,55x
EV / Sales 2023 4,19x
Nbr of Employees 79 500
Free-Float 99,9%
Chart CISCO SYSTEMS, INC.
Duration : Period :
Cisco Systems, Inc. Technical Analysis Chart | CSCO | US17275R1023 | MarketScreener
Technical analysis trends CISCO SYSTEMS, INC.
Short TermMid-TermLong Term
TrendsNeutralBullishBullish
Income Statement Evolution
Consensus
Sell
Buy
Mean consensus OUTPERFORM
Number of Analysts 29
Last Close Price 61,36 $
Average target price 63,55 $
Spread / Average Target 3,56%
EPS Revisions
Managers and Directors
Charles H. Robbins Chairman & Chief Executive Officer
Richard Scott Herren Chief Financial Officer & Executive VP
Jacqueline Guichelaar Group Chief Information Officer & Senior VP
Roland Acra Chief Technology Officer & Senior Vice President
Maria Martinez Chief Operating Officer & Executive Vice President
Sector and Competitors
1st jan.Capi. (M$)
CISCO SYSTEMS, INC.-3.17%258 792
MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS, INC.-7.57%42 415
ARISTA NETWORKS, INC.-9.75%39 867
ERICSSON2.42%37 805
FOXCONN INDUSTRIAL INTERNET CO., LTD.-4.19%35 733
NOKIA OYJ-8.06%33 574