FEDERAL · 35 U.S.C. · Chapter 31

Petitions

35 U.S.C. § 312
Title35Patents
Chapter31 — INTER PARTES REVIEW

This text of 35 U.S.C. § 312 (Petitions) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
35 U.S.C. § 312.

Text

(a)Requirements of Petition.—A petition filed under section 311 may be considered only if—
(1)the petition is accompanied by payment of the fee established by the Director under section 311;
(2)the petition identifies all real parties in interest;
(3)the petition identifies, in writing and with particularity, each claim challenged, the grounds on which the challenge to each claim is based, and the evidence that supports the grounds for the challenge to each claim, including—
(A)copies of patents and printed publications that the petitioner relies upon in support of the petition; and
(B)affidavits or declarations of supporting evidence and opinions, if the petitioner relies on expert opinions;
(4)the petition provides such other information as the Director may require by regulation;

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Credit Acceptance Corp. v. Westlake Services
859 F.3d 1044 (Federal Circuit, 2017)
92 case citations
Procter & Gamble Co. v. Kraft Foods Global, Inc.
549 F.3d 842 (Federal Circuit, 2008)
79 case citations
Wi-Fi One, LLC v. Broadcom Corporation
878 F.3d 1364 (Federal Circuit, 2018)
35 case citations
Straight Path Ip Group, Inc. v. Sipnet Eu S.R.O.
806 F.3d 1356 (Federal Circuit, 2015)
27 case citations
Regents of the Univ. of Minn. v. Lsi Corporation
926 F.3d 1327 (Federal Circuit, 2019)
24 case citations
Biodelivery Scis. Int'l, Inc. v. Aquestive Therapeutics, Inc.
898 F.3d 1205 (Federal Circuit, 2018)
20 case citations
Yita LLC v. MacNeil Ip LLC
69 F.4th 1356 (Federal Circuit, 2023)
17 case citations
Applications in Internet Time, LLC v. RPX Corp.
897 F.3d 1336 (Federal Circuit, 2018)
16 case citations
Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc.
896 F.3d 1322 (Federal Circuit, 2018)
14 case citations
Synqor, Inc. v. Vicor Corporation
988 F.3d 1341 (Federal Circuit, 2021)
14 case citations
Husky Injection Molding Systems Ltd. v. Athena Automation Ltd.
838 F.3d 1236 (Federal Circuit, 2016)
13 case citations
Adidas Ag v. Nike, Inc.
894 F.3d 1256 (Federal Circuit, 2018)
10 case citations
In Re Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC
778 F.3d 1271 (Federal Circuit, 2015)
10 case citations
Rembrandt Diagnostics, Lp v. Alere, Inc.
76 F.4th 1376 (Federal Circuit, 2023)
9 case citations
Trs. of Columbia Univ. in the City of N.Y. v. Symantec Corp.
390 F. Supp. 3d 665 (E.D. Virginia, 2019)
4 case citations
Bennett Regulator Guards, Inc. v. Atlanta Gas Light Company
905 F.3d 1311 (Federal Circuit, 2018)
4 case citations
GEA Process Engineering, Inc. v. Steuben Foods, Inc.
618 F. App'x 667 (Federal Circuit, 2015)
3 case citations
Sas Institute, Inc. v. Complementsoft, LLC.
842 F.3d 1223 (Federal Circuit, 2016)
3 case citations
Callaway Golf Co. v. Kappos
802 F. Supp. 2d 678 (E.D. Virginia, 2011)
3 case citations
Apple Inc. v. Gesture Technology Partners, LLC
129 F.4th 1367 (Federal Circuit, 2025)
2 case citations

Source Credit

History

(Added Pub. L. 106–113, div. B, §1000(a)(9) [title IV, §4604(a)], Nov. 29, 1999, 113 Stat. 1536, 1501A–568; amended Pub. L. 107–273, div. C, title III, §§13105(a), 13202(a)(2), (c)(1), Nov. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 1900–1902; Pub. L. 112–29, §6(a), (c)(3)(A)(i), Sept. 16, 2011, 125 Stat. 300, 305.)

Editorial Notes

Editorial Notes

Amendments
2011—Pub. L. 112–29, §6(a), amended section generally. Prior to amendment, section related to determination of issue by Director.
Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 112–29, §6(c)(3)(A)(i)(I), substituted "the information presented in the request shows that there is a reasonable likelihood that the requester would prevail with respect to at least 1 of the claims challenged in the request," for "a substantial new question of patentability affecting any claim of the patent concerned is raised by the request," and "A showing that there is a reasonable likelihood that the requester would prevail with respect to at least 1 of the claims challenged in the request" for "The existence of a substantial new question of patentability".
Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 112–29, §6(c)(3)(A)(i)(II), substituted "the showing required by subsection (a) has not been made," for "no substantial new question of patentability has been raised,".
2002—Pub. L. 107–273, §13202(c)(1), made technical correction to directory language of Pub. L. 106–113, which enacted this section.
Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 107–273, §13202(a)(2)(A), struck out second sentence which read as follows: "On the Director's initiative, and at any time, the Director may determine whether a substantial new question of patentability is raised by patents and publications."
Pub. L. 107–273, §13105(a), inserted at end "The existence of a substantial new question of patentability is not precluded by the fact that a patent or printed publication was previously cited by or to the Office or considered by the Office."
Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 107–273, §13202(a)(2)(B), struck out ", if any" after "third-party requester".

Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries

Effective Date of 2011 Amendment
Amendment by section 6(a) of Pub. L. 112–29 effective upon the expiration of the 1-year period beginning on Sept. 16, 2011, and applicable to any patent issued before, on, or after that effective date, with provisions for graduated implementation, see section 6(c)(2) of Pub. L. 112–29, set out as a note under section 311 of this title.
Pub. L. 112–29, §6(c)(3)(B), (C), Sept. 16, 2011, 125 Stat. 305, provided that:
"(B) Application.—The amendments made by this paragraph [amending this section and section 313 of this title]—
"(i) shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act [Sept. 16, 2011]; and
"(ii) shall apply to requests for inter partes reexamination that are filed on or after such date of enactment, but before the effective date set forth in paragraph (2)(A) of this subsection [set out as a note under section 311 of this title].
"(C) Continued applicability of prior provisions.—The provisions of chapter 31 of title 35, United States Code, as amended by this paragraph [amending this section and section 313 of this title], shall continue to apply to requests for inter partes reexamination that are filed before the effective date set forth in paragraph (2)(A) as if subsection (a) [enacting section 319 of this title and amending this section and sections 312 to 318 of this title] had not been enacted."

Effective Date of 2002 Amendment
Amendment by section 13105(a) of Pub. L. 107–273 applicable with respect to any determination of the Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office that is made on or after Nov. 2, 2002, see section 13105(b) of Pub. L. 107–273, set out as a note under section 303 of this title.

Effective Date
Section effective Nov. 29, 1999, and applicable to any patent issuing from an original application filed in the United States on or after that date, see section 1000(a)(9) [title IV, §4608(a)] of Pub. L. 106–113, set out as an Effective Date of 1999 Amendment note under section 41 of this title.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
35 U.S.C. § 312, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/usc/35/312.