The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has recently de-designated the precedential status of its decision in SharkNinja Operating LLC v. iRobot Corp., a move that could significantly impact how interested party issues are addressed in patent challenges. This change may provide patent owners with a new avenue to contest petitions based on the disclosure of real parties in interest (RPIs).
In the SharkNinja case, the PTAB had previously held that an RPI analysis was not required at the institution phase of a trial proceeding unless the patent owner alleged that the petition would be time-barred or the petitioner would be estopped due to an unnamed RPI. However, the Board acknowledged that the disclosure of RPIs serves purposes beyond addressing time-bar and estoppel issues. Consequently, the decision has been de-designated from precedential status and is no longer binding on the PTAB. ([uspto.gov](https://www.uspto.gov/subscription-center/2025/ptab-de-designates-decision?utm_source=openai))
This development aligns with a broader trend of the PTAB emphasizing the importance of RPI disclosures. For instance, in POSCO Co., Ltd. v. Arcelormittal, the Acting USPTO Director considered the petitioner’s settled expectations, noting that the petitioner had previously invalidated all claims of a parent of the challenged patents. This context influenced the decision to proceed with the inter partes reviews despite factors that might have favored discretionary denial. ([finnegan.com](https://www.finnegan.com/en/insights/blogs/at-the-ptab-blog/in-posco-petitioner-prevails-due-to-prior-parental-patent-proceeding.html?utm_source=openai))
Additionally, the Federal Circuit has clarified the extent to which patent owners can appeal PTAB decisions regarding RPIs. In a recent ruling, the court determined that patent owners do not have a “freestanding” right to demand an RPI determination from the PTAB, especially when they have not suffered an injury in fact that is addressable by the court. ([insight.rpxcorp.com](https://insight.rpxcorp.com/news/86834-patent-owners-have-no-freestanding-right-to-ptab-rpi-determination-rules-federal-circuit?utm_source=openai))
These developments suggest that the PTAB is placing greater emphasis on the accurate disclosure of RPIs, which could influence the institution and outcome of patent challenges. Patent owners and petitioners alike should be mindful of these changes, as they may affect strategies related to the identification and disclosure of interested parties in PTAB proceedings.