Insights
Search Results
News Articles
3.20.26
Jad Mills, Richard Torczon Appointed to PTAB Bar Leadership
On March 20, 2026, Wilson Sonsini partner Jad Mills was elected to the board of directors of the PTAB Bar Association and senior counsel Richard Torczon was appointed to Chair of the organization’s Trials Committee. The PTAB Bar Association is committed to preserving and promoting the professional and ethical standards of lawyers and stakeholders who appear before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).
News Articles
2.17.26
WIPR Recognizes Wilson Sonsini in USA Patent Rankings 2025
World Intellectual Property Review (WIPR) recognized Wilson Sonsini’s patents practice in the 2025 edition of “WIPR USA Patents,” a comprehensive analysis of the leading law firms and attorneys in the U.S. Wilson Sonsini is ranked as a “Recommended Firm” and is noted for its patent work and for its bench of deeply knowledgeable practitioners. The firm is also recognized for its work in cutting-edge technology sectors, including artificial intelligence and machine learning.
Newsletters
2.05.26
The PTAB Review – January 2026
The January 2026 issue of The PTAB Review discusses notable developments at the PTAB, including changes to institution procedures, and precedential and informative decisions, explores several appellate decisions relevant to PTAB trials, and examines potential rule changes submitted for comment.
Client Highlights
12.02.25
Wilson Sonsini Secures PTAB Institution in Five IPRs Filed for Azurity Pharmaceuticals
On November 19, 2025, Wilson Sonsini obtained a significant milestone for Azurity Pharmaceuticals, with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) instituting inter partes review in all five petitions the firm filed on Azurity’s behalf. The petitions challenge methods and compositions for treating chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. The Board’s institution decisions found a reasonable likelihood that Azurity will prevail on at least one challenged claim in each proceeding and authorized full trials on the grounds raised. The Board’s decisions are a notable milestone in the current PTAB environment, where institution rates have tightened significantly. Three Administrative Patent Judges independently concluded the challenges were reasonably likely to succeed, and the cases will now proceed to the yearlong trial phase.
Client Highlights
6.24.25
Wilson Sonsini Convinces Federal Circuit to Vacate and Remand Adverse PTAB Decision
On June 20, 2025, Wilson Sonsini obtained a significant Federal Circuit victory on behalf of Mylan. A team of the firm’s patent litigators successfully appealed an adverse decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) concerning a foundational patent protecting the brand product Trulance®. In a unanimous panel opinion, the Federal Circuit vacated the adverse decision and remanded the case to the PTAB.
Alerts
6.12.25
Patent Office Denial of “Late” Inter Partes Review Petitions Changes Expectations
On June 6, 2025, the acting Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), Coke Morgan Stewart, issued a decision in iRhythm Technologies v. Welch Allyn, Inc.1 that initiates a new basis for discretionary denial of inter partes review (IPR) petitions. The Director denied institution of iRhythm’s IPR petitions because iRhythm had upset Welch Allyn’s settled expectations in the enjoyment of its patents. iRhythm is the first such IPR discretionary denial and raises questions about the scope of this new doctrine and its congruence with judicial and congressional developments.
Alerts
7.01.24
U.S. Supreme Court Administrative Law Decisions Raise Questions for U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Proceedings
Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court decided two important administrative law cases that are expected to increase judicial authority over agency adjudications and rulemaking. In Securities & Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy (decided June 27), the Court held that when the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) seeks civil penalties for securities fraud, the defendant is entitled to a jury trial. In Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (decided June 28), the Court held that courts should not defer to an agency statutory interpretation. While each ruling might have significant effects on some agencies, their effect on the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) should be much more limited because, generally, USPTO regulatory authorities are much more limited and because USPTO’s primary reviewing court, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, is a specialized court that does not defer to USPTO on legal questions.
Press Releases
12.06.21
Wilson Sonsini Elects 23 New Partners
Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, the premier provider of legal services to technology, life sciences, and growth enterprises worldwide, today announced that the firm has elected 23 new partners from its attorney ranks. The promotions will go into effect on February 1, 2022.
Client Highlights
12.01.21
Federal Circuit Affirms Moderna Loss Against Wilson Sonsini-Led Arbutus Biopharma in Patent Dispute
On December 1, 2021, the Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB’s) earlier rulings that ModernaTX, Inc. (formerly Moderna Therapeutics Inc.) failed to invalidate claims in two Arbutus Biopharma Corp. patents, known as the '069 and ’435 patents, and left the ‘069 patent fully intact. The trading price of Arbutus shares jumped as much as 95 percent after the court posted its opinions on its electronic docket. Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati represented Arbutus in the matter.
Newsletters
1.25.21
2020 PTAB Year in Review
The firm's post-grant practice is pleased to present its 2020 PTAB Year in Review. The publication begins with a review of 2020 petition filings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and takes a closer look at the impact of the precedential Fintiv decision on discretionary denials of institution. It also provides a summary of recent precedential decisions and administrative directives, explores important appellate decisions relating to PTAB trials, offers an update on the PTAB's Motion to Amend Pilot Program, and addresses the continuing dispute over whether PTAB judges are constitutionally appointed.
Alerts
4.21.20
Supreme Court: PTAB Decisions "Closely Related" to Institution—Such as the One-Year Time Bar—Are Not Appealable to the Federal Circuit
The America Invents Act (AIA) authorizes the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) to cancel patent claims that never should have been issued but prohibits the PTAB from acting on petitions for review brought more than one year after the petitioner is sued for patent infringement. 35 U.S.C. § 315(b). On April 20, 2020, the Supreme Court issued a 7-2 decision in Thryv, Inc. v. Click-to-Call Techs., LP, No. 18-916, holding that there is no appellate review of the PTAB's decisions to cancel patent claims on the basis that the petitioner filed too late. In so doing, the Supreme Court also unwound any judicial enforcement mechanism for the Federal Circuit's rule that a complaint that is voluntarily dismissed "without prejudice" still triggers the § 315(b) time bar. See Click-to-Call Techs., LP v. Ingenio, Inc., 899 F.3d 1321, 1328 (Fed. Cir. 2018). However, the director of the Patent Office has indicated that he agrees with the Federal Circuit's interpretation of § 315(b) and thus the PTAB is likely to continue to follow the now vacated Click-to-Call decision.