Law360 turned to Erise IP Shareholder Jason Mudd for reaction to the U.S. Supreme Court’s June 20 decision to affirm Cuozzo V. Lee.

In the Law360 article “Attys React To High Court’s PTAB Claim Construction Ruling,” Mudd is quoted as saying, “Today’s decision affirming the PTO’s use of the BRI standard in IPRs brings much needed clarity to a fundamental issue affecting all IPR proceedings, which have become the dominant means by which parties challenge the validity of issued patents. This decision ends the debate in the courts and effectively shifts it to policymakers at the PTO and Congress.”

Not only did Mudd and Erise Shareholder Jennifer Bailey lead Garmin to victory in an earlier version of the Cuozzo case that served as the first IPR, but in addition, to date, Erise sits at the top of the list nationally for IPR success on a per-capita basis.

Mudd also said in the Law360 article, “The court was not as clear in its resolution of the second issue relating to nonreviewability of the PTO’s decisions to institute IPRs . . . The majority suggests judicial review remains available for certain acts of the PTO that exceed constitutional limits or that clearly exceed certain aspects of its statutory authority, but it appears to leave for another day the open question of what other issues could be reviewable.”

Read the complete Law360 article here.