The America Invents Act of 2011 es- tablished several new proceedings at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) that allow parties to challenge the validity of issued patents. The most popular of these proceedings is inter partes review (IPR), which permits a party to challenge patents on anticipation and obviousness grounds using patents and printed publications.
IPR is an adversarial process that involves discovery and depositions, is subject to the Federal Rules of Evidence, and culminates in oral argument. Although IPR in these respects resembles patent litigation, there are significant differences between the two that patent attorneys—particularly litigators who wish to participate in IPR—should bear in mind. This article highlights some of those differences.
