Garmin v. Cuozzo Speed Technologies

All challenged claims cancelled

The Board instituted review of three of the patent's twenty challenged claims and cancelled all three as unpatentable, a result the Federal Circuit and the Supreme Court both affirmed on further review.^[19][22][29]

Petition filed September 16, 2012·Institution decision January 9, 2013·Final written decision November 13, 2013·Federal Circuit panel affirms February 4, 2015·Federal Circuit denies rehearing en banc July 8, 2015·Supreme Court affirms June 20, 2016

• The challenged patent covers a vehicle speedometer that shows the driver both the current speed and the legal speed limit for that location.^[10][11]
• The Board denied institution on seventeen of the twenty challenged claims but instituted review of claims 10, 14, and 17 on two obviousness grounds.^[3]
• Applying the broadest-reasonable-interpretation standard, the Board construed integrally attached to require two discrete parts joined together, then found all three instituted claims obvious and denied Cuozzo's bid to amend them.^[13][19][20]
• The Federal Circuit affirmed over Judge Newman's dissent, the full court denied rehearing en banc, and the Supreme Court affirmed again, holding the institution decision unreviewable.^{[22][24][6][8]}

Cuozzo remains the leading precedent on the limited judicial review of PTAB institution decisions, even though the broadest-reasonable-interpretation standard it upheld no longer governs inter partes review.^[28]