“The patent owner is bringing in new counsel to assess and present these issues, including Andrei Iancu… An extension of time would better enable preparation of a request that will be helpful to the Director,” EPC’s filing states.
The challenge stems from an IPR petition filed by Innoscience, a Guangdong-based company claiming to be the largest global producer of GaN chips. EPC has previously accused Innoscience of hiring former employees to develop infringing products. In November 2023, the U.S. International Trade Commission agreed with EPC’s claims and barred Innoscience from importing the disputed chips—an order now under appeal by the Chinese firm, citing the PTAB’s March ruling.
EPC argues that had the USPTO’s updated guidance on parallel litigation and discretionary denials—issued March 24—been in effect one week earlier, the PTAB would have dismissed Innoscience’s IPR petition entirely.
Innoscience’s legal team, led by Lionel Lavenue of Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP, called EPC’s request “extraordinary and unprecedented,” stating that nothing in the recent memo supports retroactive application to finalized IPR cases.
Still, both companies are pressing for further review by the USPTO director. On the same day as EPC’s request, Innoscience filed its own challenge to the PTAB’s partial allowance of EPC’s claim amendments.
