id	author	title	date	pages	extension	mime	words	sentence	flesch	summary	cache	txt
inlawrev-25097	Carter, R. Trevor; Hayden, Leslie B.; Dodge, Reid E.	Developments in Intellectual Property Law: October 1, 2017-September 30, 2018	2021	22	.pdf	application/pdf	8911	479	61	Cir. 2015), and held that determinations made by the PTAB regarding the one-year time bar and whether to institute inter partes review are appealable.140 A. Background With the passage of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (“AIA”) in 2011, Congress created inter partes review and other post-grant proceedings in order to provide an efficient alternative to litigation for third parties to challenge the patentability of issued claims.141 The two most pertinent provisions from the AIA in this case are § 314(d), which provides that “[t]he determination by the Director whether to institute an inter partes review under this section shall be final and nonappealable,”142 and § 315(b), which provides that “[a]n inter partes review may not be instituted if the petition requesting the proceeding is filed more than 1 year after the date on which the petitioner, real part in interest, or privy of the petitioner is served with a complaint alleging infringement of the patent. OIL STATES V. GREENE’S ENERGY GROUP, LLC In April 2018, the Supreme Court issued a highly-anticipated 7-2 decision in Oil States Energy Services LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC upholding the constitutionality of the inter partes review process for patents.7 The Court found that inter partes review does not violate Article III or the Seventh Amendment.8 A. Background The America Invents Act of 2011 created the inter partes review process as a means for reexamining the validity of previously-issued patents.9 An inter * R. Trevor Carter is a partner with the law firm Faegre Baker Daniels LLP in Indianapolis, Indiana.	cache/inlawrev-25097.pdf	txt/inlawrev-25097.txt