This episode is about an Opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) in 2025, addressing an appeal by Gesture Technology Partners, LLC concerning the unpatentability of its ’431 patent. The case centered on an ex parte reexamination that proceeded despite the existence of two related inter partes reviews (IPRs) that had already found most claims invalid. Gesture challenged the Patent Office’s denial of its petition to terminate the review, arguing that IPR estoppel should apply against the requester (Samsung) to an ongoing ex parte proceeding, but the CAFC rejected this statutory interpretation, confirming that the estoppel provision is inapplicable against the Patent Office maintaining the reexamination. Furthermore, the court rejected Gesture’s assertion that the Patent Office lacked jurisdiction over the expired patent, upholding prior reasoning that such reviews create a live case or controversy. Ultimately, the CAFC affirmed the PTAB's conclusion that prior art anticipated claims 11 and 13, thereby affirming the unpatentability of all remaining claims in the patent.

This podcast is for entertainment purposes only and does not create an attorney-client relationship. The AI-generated hosts are not attorneys and are not providing legal advice. The choice of a lawyer is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements.