Technology · NEWS EXPLAINER
Supreme Court declines Google challenge to older-patent review policy
The justices denied review in Google v. VirtaMove, leaving the Patent Office’s refusal to open this particular inter partes review intact without deciding whether the policy is lawful.
The U.S. Supreme Court on October 19 declined to hear Google’s challenge to a Patent Office policy used to deny administrative review of an older VirtaMove software patent. The official order list confirms the denial.
The narrow procedural result matters: the Court did not issue an opinion on the policy’s legality, did not decide the underlying infringement case and did not rule on a separate challenge to related Patent Office practices.
The Court denied review rather than deciding the rule’s legality
The October 19 order list says only that Google’s petition for certiorari was denied. A denial of certiorari does not endorse the lower court’s reasoning or decide whether the Patent Office policy is lawful. It leaves the existing result in place for this case.
The dispute centered on an older software patent
Reuters reports that VirtaMove accused Google of infringing a server-software patent. Google sought inter partes review at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, but the agency declined to institute review after emphasizing that the patent had been in force for more than 14 years and had created strong settled expectations.
Google argued the agency created a time limit Congress did not
In its petition, Google said the Patent Office exceeded its authority by treating patent age and settled expectations as grounds for denying review. That is Google’s legal position, not a Supreme Court holding. The Court’s one-line denial gives no reasons and does not resolve the statutory argument.
The immediate consequence is procedural
The denial means Google does not get Supreme Court review of this particular attempt to force reconsideration of the PTAB decision. It does not itself determine whether Google infringes VirtaMove’s patent, cancel the patent or award damages. Those are separate questions from whether the agency institutes administrative review.
Related challenges are still not resolved by this order
Reuters notes that Google, Apple and Intel have pursued a separate challenge to a related Patent Office policy, and that Google and Intel have also asked the Supreme Court to hear that matter. The October 19 denial in Google v. VirtaMove should not be read as a ruling on that separate petition.
