Inter Partes Review Petitions Denied for Failing to List all Real Parties

Jan 9, 2015

Reading Time : 1 min

The PTAB denied two petitions for inter partes review filed by the same petitioners for failing to list all real partiesin­interest. Under the AIA, a petition for inter partes review may be considered only if “the petition identifies all real parties in interest.” The patent owner argued petitioners failed to identify entities that are co­plaintiffs with petitioners in the declaratory judgment actions seeking to invalidate the patents that are the subject of the petitions, filed on the same day as the IPR petition. The patent owner also argued that the non­identified entities have a corporate relationship with each petitioner. Some of the non­identified entities exercised control over a petitioner in connection with the dispute involving the subject patent. The board found that a parent corporation that has exercised control, on behalf of itself and a petitioner, over the dispute involving the patent­at­issue is a real party­in­interest. The board explained that “the touchstone for determining whether a non­party is a real partyin­interest is whether the non­party exercises control over a party’s participation in the proceeding.” And a failure to list such an entity is a basis for denying a petition for inter partes review. Furthermore, the board stated that any attempt to cure the omission to add the non­identified entity as a real party in interest would be futile because the unidentified party has already filed the declaratory judgment suit. By filing the declaratory judgment suit, the party is estopped under AIA rules from filing an IPR petition.

Paramount Home Ent. Inc. v. Nissim Corp., IPR2014­00961, IPR2014­00962 (PTAB Dec. 29, 2014).[Scanlon (opinion), Fitzpatrick, Murphy].

Share This Insight

Previous Entries

IP Newsflash

March 12, 2026

The Northern District of Illinois recently dismissed a complaint without prejudice for failing to plausibly allege patent infringement. The court found that the allegations of direct infringement were insufficiently pled where the images of the accused product included in the complaint did not appear to show a particular necessary element of the claims.

...

Read More

IP Newsflash

March 12, 2026

The District of New Jersey recently denied the litigants’ request for a briefing schedule to resolve a dispute about a proposed discovery confidentiality order, and also denied extending the deadlines for the defendants’ invalidity and non-infringement contentions. At issue was the scope of the FDA and patent prosecution bars in the confidentiality order.

...

Read More

IP Newsflash

February 27, 2026

The USPTO Director denied a patent owner’s request for discretionary denial of two inter partes review (IPR) petitions, citing the petitioner’s “well-settled expectation” that it would not be accused of infringing the two challenged patents. The Director’s conclusion was based on the petitioner’s decade-long business relationship with the original owner of the challenged patents.

...

Read More

IP Newsflash

February 24, 2026

The Southern District of Florida recently dismissed a complaint without prejudice because the allegations used a form of “shotgun pleading.” The court explained that a shotgun pleading includes those where every count incorporates every preceding paragraph into each cause of action, and that dismissal of such pleadings was required under Eleventh Circuit precedent.

...

Read More

© 2026 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP. All rights reserved. Attorney advertising. This document is distributed for informational use only; it does not constitute legal advice and should not be used as such. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Akin is the practicing name of Akin Gump LLP, a New York limited liability partnership authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under number 267321. A list of the partners is available for inspection at Eighth Floor, Ten Bishops Square, London E1 6EG. For more information about Akin Gump LLP, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP and other associated entities under which the Akin Gump network operates worldwide, please see our Legal Notices page.