On April 10, Chris Loh published “Key factors affecting USPTO Director Squires' IPR institution denials” in Westlaw Today. This article outlines three factors affecting the current USPTO director’s decisions to deny institution of IPR proceedings, namely, inconsistent claim construction positions, a failure to identify all real parties in interest, and duplicative challenges. The following is an excerpt:
Director Squires has since October 2025 exercised his plenary authority under 35 U.S.C. § 314(a) to decide whether to institute or deny institution of each new IPR petition by himself. He has announced those institution decisions in a series of frequent, albeit irregularly timed, "Notices of Decisions on Institution." Those notices list in bulk the docket numbers of multiple IPR petitions for which institution has been granted or denied, with little to no discussion of why.
The absence of any detailed opinion in Director Squires' bulk notices takes advantage of the fact that IPR institution decisions are "final and nonappealable" under 35 U.S.C. 314(d) and thus are unreviewable by any Article III court. This lack of reasoning disserves prospective IPR petitioners and patent owners who wish to discern the broader logic behind Director Squires' IPR institution decision-making. Nevertheless, at least some reasons underlying Director Squires' IPR institution denials have become clear through his designation (or de-designation) of certain prior PTAB decisions as precedential, and from the handful of opinions he has authored outside of his summary notices that address specific IPR petitions.
Click here to access the article.