The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit shut down challenges from Cambridge Industries and Sandisk Technologies to the United States Patent and Trademark Office's (USPTO) new policy that allows the USPTO agency to deny America Invents Act (AIA) patent reviews when a patent is old enough that the owner has “settled expectations” it won’t be attacked. 

Both companies wanted mandamus relief, arguing the policy was unlawful, newly invented, and never went through proper rule making. The court said they didn’t come close to meeting the high bar for mandamus. 

The court emphasized it wasn’t deciding whether the agency’s policy is right or wrong, only that decisions denying institution are generally unreviewable, and the companies hadn’t shown any constitutional issue that would let the court step in. The court denied Sandisk’s petition for the same reasons as Cambridge’s.

In the Cambridge case, the USPTO denied review of the Applied Optoelectronics patents that were seven to nine years old. In the Sandisk case, it denied review of the Polaris PowerLED Technologies patents that were nine to 12 years old. 

For patent owners, this decision landed as a clear win and a reminder that agency discretion still carries real weight.