Ironburg Inventions Ltd. v. Valve Corp., Appeal No. 2024-2088 (Fed. Cir. June 18, 2026)

N
Nika Aldrich
Schwabe Williamson & Wyatt
June 22, 2026PTAB1 min read

Contributed by Schwabe Williamson & Wyatt. Originally published on Patexia; republished here as part of the LexDana archive.

CASE OF THE WEEK

Ironburg Inventions Ltd. v. Valve Corp., Appeal No. 2024-2088 (Fed. Cir. June 18, 2026)

In its only precedential patent opinion last week, the Federal Circuit for the second time considered estoppel under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e) in the context of infringement claims against videogame controllers provided by Valve Corporation.  Section 315(e) prohibits a petitioner in a completed inter partes review from later asserting any grounds for invalidity “that the petitioner raised or reasonably could have raised during that inter partes review.”  In a previous appeal in this case in 2023 (our write up here), the Federal Circuit held for the first time that the standard to be applied for the “reasonably could have raised” inquiry is whether “a skilled searcher conducting a diligent search reasonably could have been expected to discover” the grounds to be estopped.  In the instant appeal following remand, the Federal Circuit provided further guidance on application of that “skilled searcher” standard, reversing the district court’s conclusion that Valve’s relevant invalidity arguments were estopped.

READ MORE

Editors:

Jason A. Wrubleski, Shareholder

Nika Aldrich, IP Litigation Group Leader, Schwabe

Contributor:  Jason Wrubleski

 

More insights

Data: FDA Orange & Purple Books · prosecution & litigation metadata · read-only.