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

June 5, 2026

The Supreme Court unanimously held that for a complaint of induced infringement, a patent owner must allege that the accused infringer took affirmative, not passive, steps to encourage direct infringement. Thus, where a generic drug has a skinny label, to induce infringement of the carved-out patented use of the drug, the generic company must have taken steps that were designed to cause others to perform the patented use, not just steps that could cause such conduct.

...

Read More

IP Newsflash

May 07, 2026

The Northern District of Illinois granted a summary judgment motion of no invalidity based on indefiniteness because the qualitative terms like “sufficiently slow” and “desired period of time” were definite when viewed in light of the surrounding claim language and specification.

...

Read More

IP Newsflash

April 9, 2026

In the April 1, 2026 edition of the Official Gazette, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office announced a new procedural framework that permits patent owners to submit a limited, early response to a request for ex parte reexamination.

...

Read More

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

© 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.