Thomas J. Engellenner, a partner in the Intellectual Property Department of Pepper Hamilton, was quoted in the October 4, 2017 IPWatchdog article, "Industry Reaction to the Federal Circuit’s Decision in Aqua Products v. Matal."
For some patent owners (e.g., plaintiffs in patent infringement suits), the Aqua Products decision may not be of strategic importance since amending claims in a post-grant review proceeding can extinguish one’s right to past infringement damages in an underlying federal court litigation. However, for many other patent owners, Aqua Products will certainly change the calculus of how a patent owner responds to a challenge to its patent. One thing for sure, the ability to amend a patent should put to the test the USPTO oft-repeated position that the PTAB’s use of the broadest reasonable interpretation almost never affects the outcome of an AIA proceeding. Patent owners faced with what they consider to be an unreasonably broad interpretation of a claim element will now have an ability to correct the record – and defend their patents on their own terms.