Director Vidal designates decision as precedential

Published on: 11/15/2023 9:51 AM


Patent Trial and Appeal Board

US Patent and Trademark Office

Director Vidal designates decision as precedential

Penumbra, Inc. v. RapidPulse, Inc., IPR2021-01466, Paper 34 (March 10, 2023) – (precedential as to section II.E.3)

This decision addresses the holding by the Federal Circuit in Dynamic Drinkware, LLC v. Nat’l Graphics, Inc., 800 F.3d 1375, 1378 (Fed. Cir. 2015), that under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 102(e), a reference patent’s claims must have written description support in its provisional application to be entitled to that provisional application’s filing date for prior art purposes. The decision designated precedential today determines that the holding in Dynamic Drinkware does not apply to AIA § 102(d), i.e., Dynamic Drinkware applies to pre-AIA patents, but not post-AIA patents. The decision explains that for prior art determinations under AIA § 102, a reference patent document need only meet the ministerial requirements of 35 U.S.C. §§ 119 and 120, and that the provisional or other earlier applications to which the reference patent claims a right of priority must describe the subject matter relied upon in the reference patent as prior art.

Learn more about Patent Trial and Appeal Board precedential and informative decisions


Stay connected with the USPTO by subscribing to regular email updates.

Visit our subscription center at to update or change your email preferences.

This email was sent from an unmonitored mailbox. To contact us, please visit our website To ensure that you continue to receive our news and notices, please modify your email filters to allow mail from