This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

P sought an inter partes review of ComplementSoft’s software patent. P alleged that all 16 of the patent’s claims were unpatentable for various reasons. D concluded that SAS was likely to succeed with respect to at least one of the claims and that an inter partes review was therefore warranted. D instituted review on only some (claims 1 and 3-10) and denied review on the rest. D issued a final written decision finding claims 1, 3, and 5-10 to be unpatentable while upholding claim 4. D’s decision did not address the remaining claims on which the D had refused review. P sought review in the Federal Circuit and argued that §318(a) required D to decide the patentability of every claim P challenged in its petition, not just some. The Federal Circuit rejected P. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.