News & Events

April 25, 2013

Post-Grant Alert: PTAB Trial Transcript Released for SAP America, Inc. v. Versata Development Group, Inc.

April 25, 2013
Written by Dorothy Whelan and Karl Renner.

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) released the transcript from the first-ever oral hearing conducted before the Patent Trials and Appeals Board (PTAB) in an America Invents Act post-grant proceeding. The hearing, which was conducted just last week, involved a patent that was challenged using the transitional program for covered business method patents (TPCBM). It is between SAP America Inc. and Versata Development Group Inc. and is styled as case number CBM2012-00001 at the PTAB. The patent is also involved in co-pending litigation, namely Versata Software Inc. et al. v. SAP America Inc. et al., case number 2:07-cv-00153 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, and case number 12-1029 in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

The hearing was two hours long, with much of the time used by counselors who addressed questions offered by judges during the allotted time. Indeed, as would be expected, the judges tested counsel for petitioner with questions about his contention that the challenged patent was merely an unpatentable abstract idea, and they correspondingly tested counsel for patentee with questions about his position that the challenged patent covers an improvement over existing computer technology.

As stipulated by the rules governing these proceedings, the hearing was limited to attorney argument and response and did not feature witnesses or other trial-like features. In this sense, the format was less like a District Court litigation trial and more akin to the format of a conventional oral argument before the USPTO.

Much like conventional oral hearings held at the USPTO, many of the questions were focused on the details. We also note that the panel members focused their attention on issues raised in the pre-hearing briefs. We expect more of the same on each of these points, based on our experience in such proceedings, and caution that judges at the USPTO generally focus on the nuts and bolts of arguments presented in pre-hearing briefing and precise claim language, as compared with their District Court counterparts.

As is apparent from the transcript, of the three judges on the panel, Judge Tierney asked nearly all the questions. This, too, is consistent with historic practice before the PTAB, as one judge on the panel is assigned at the outset to write the opinion and usually takes the lead in questioning the parties.

The USPTO has not yet held a hearing on any of the cases involving the other new America Invents Act program, known as inter partes review.

No Comments

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Fill out the form below to receive our monthly newsletter and updates on your selected areas of interest. You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the unsubscribe link at the bottom of the email.

  • Fish & Richardson P.C. is committed to protecting and respecting your privacy, and we’ll only use your personal information to administer your account and to provide the services you requested from us. From time to time, we would like to contact you about our services, as well as other content that may be of interest to you. If you consent to us contacting you for this purpose, please tick below.
  • In order to provide you the content requested, we need to store and process your personal data. If you consent to us storing your personal data for this purpose, please tick the checkbox below.
  • You can unsubscribe from these communications at any time. This can be done by clicking the unsubscribe link at the bottom of marketing emails you receive from us, or by emailing info@fr.com stating that you would like to be unsubscribed.
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.