Blog

Challenge of PTAB's Authority at the District Court Amounts to Impermissible Collateral Attack

Authors

Benefit Funding Systems LLC et al., v. Advance America Cash Advance Centers Inc. et al., __ F.3d __ (Fed. Cir. September 25, 2014) (PROST, Lourie, Hughes) (D. Del.: Stark) (3 of 5 stars)


Federal Circuit affirms district court's decision to stay pending covered business method review.


Federal Circuit affirms district court's decision to stay pending covered business method review (CBM) because appellants' single argument—that the PTAB is not authorized to conduct CBM review based on 35 U.S.C. § 101—is an impermissible collateral attack. In the context of a stay determination, the district court "need not and should not analyze whether the PTAB might, at some later date, be determined to have acted outside its authority in instituting and conducting CBM review." Slip op. at 7.

The opinions expressed are those of the authors on the date noted above and do not necessarily reflect the views of Fish & Richardson P.C., any other of its lawyers, its clients, or any of its or their respective affiliates. This post is for general information purposes only and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal advice. No attorney-client relationship is formed.