35 U.S.C. § 316 — Conduct of inter partes review

(a) Regulations. The Director must write rules covering thirteen specific things: (1) making the case file public, except that a petition or document filed with a motion asking for it to be sealed stays sealed until the Patent Office rules on that motion; (2) setting the standard for showing there are enough grounds to start a review under section 314(a); (3) creating a process for submitting extra information after the petition is filed; (4) setting up how inter partes review works and how it relates to other proceedings under this title; (5) setting standards and procedures for discovery of relevant evidence — limited to (A) deposing witnesses who filed affidavits or declarations, and (B) whatever else justice requires; (6) creating penalties for abusing discovery or the process, or misusing the proceeding to harass someone or cause needless delay or expense; (7) allowing protective orders to govern how confidential information is exchanged and filed; (8) letting the patent owner file a response to the petition after review is instituted, and requiring the owner to submit, through affidavits or declarations, any extra evidence and expert opinions they rely on; (9) setting standards and procedures for the patent owner to move to amend the patent under subsection (d) — to cancel a challenged claim or propose a reasonable number of replacement claims — and making sure the supporting information the owner submits becomes part of the public record; (10) giving either side the right to an oral hearing; (11) requiring the final decision within one year after the Director announces the review has started, though the Director may extend that by up to six months for good cause, and may adjust these deadlines when a case is joined under section 315(c); (12) setting a deadline for requesting that kind of joinder; and (13) giving the petitioner at least one chance to file written comments within a time the Director sets. (b) Considerations. When writing these rules, the Director must weigh their effect on the economy, on the patent system's integrity, on how efficiently the Office runs, and on the Office's ability to finish reviews on time. (c) Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The Board, following section 6, conducts every inter partes review that gets instituted. (d) Amendment of the patent. (1) During a review, the patent owner may file one motion to amend the patent — either to (A) cancel a challenged claim, or (B) propose a reasonable number of replacement claims for each challenged claim. (2) More amendment motions are allowed if the petitioner and patent owner jointly ask, to help settle the case under section 317, or if the Director's regulations otherwise allow it. (3) No amendment may make a claim broader than it was, or add new material that was not already there. (e) Evidentiary standards. The petitioner carries the burden of proving that a claim is unpatentable, and must prove it by a preponderance of the evidence — meaning it is more likely than not to be true.