In Ingenico Inc. v. IOENGINE, LLC, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit resolved a spilt among the district courts concerning the meaning of “ground” in the inter partes review (IPR) estoppel statute, holding that IPR estoppel does not preclude petitioners from later relying on the same patents and printed publications as evidence in asserting invalidity grounds that they could not have raised during the IPR, such as invalidity because the claimed invention was known or used by others, on sale, or in public use.
Source link
