Lynk Labs, Inc. v. Samsung Elecs. Co
Authored by: Jeremy J. Gustrowsky
In a recent decision, the Federal Circuit clarified a key question for patent law: Can a published patent application be used as prior art in an inter partes review (IPR) based on its filing date, even if it wasn’t publicly available until later? In Lynk Labs, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., the court answered “yes,” affirming that published patent applications can be treated as prior art as of their filing date in IPR proceedings.
The dispute centered on U.S. Patent No. 10,687,400, owned by Lynk Labs, Inc., which covers certain LED lighting systems. Samsung challenged several claims of this patent in an IPR, relying in part on U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2004/0206970 (“Martin”). Although Martin was filed before the Lynk Labs patent’s priority date, it was published only after that date. Lynk Labs argued that Martin shouldn’t count as prior art because it wasn’t publicly accessible before their patent’s priority date.
The Federal Circuit disagreed, explaining that Congress created a special rule for published patent applications in 35 U.S.C. § 102(e)(1). Under this rule, a published patent application is considered prior art as of its filing date, not its publication date. The court emphasized that this approach is consistent with the purpose of IPRs, which are meant to focus on prior art that is easily accessible and typically handled by patent examiners, like patents and published applications.
Beyond this main issue, the court also addressed how certain claim terms should be interpreted, siding with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s broader reading. Ultimately, the court affirmed that the challenged claims of the Lynk Labs patent were unpatentable for obviousness. This decision reinforces the importance of early filing dates for patent applications and clarifies that published applications can be powerful prior art in IPRs—even before the public sees them.