Drafting and Prosecuting Patent Applications to Withstand PTAB Scrutiny

Building Reasonable Claim Construction to Avoid Unpatentability and Using Declarations to Survive Post-Grant Proceedings

Recording of a 90-minute premium CLE webinar with Q&A

Conducted on Tuesday, November 19, 2019

Recorded event now available

or call 1-800-926-7926
Program Materials

This CLE webinar will provide guidance to patent counsel for drafting and prosecuting U.S. patent applications to achieve the broadest claim interpretations that avoid unpatentability and provide a basis for proving infringement. The panel will offer best practices to solidify novelty, non-obviousness, enablement, and written description positions, both for litigation and PTAB AIA post-grant proceedings.


IPRs remain weighted in favor of patent challengers, and the ability to amend, not just cancel, claims in post-grant proceedings has been rare. Institution rates remain high (about two-thirds of petitions are granted) as do cancellation rates of instituted claims (According to the latest USPTO stats, in 63% of Final Written Decisions all claims were canceled). Practitioners must act during drafting and prosecution to strengthen their potentially critical patent applications against PTAB scrutiny.

The initial objective for a patent owner is to have the petition denied. A well-drafted specification and file history, possibly including declarations presented therein, provide the basis for the patent owner's preliminary response (POPR), and a means to avoid institution of an IPR or PGR entirely or possibly even to achieve a settlement.

Listen as our authoritative panel offers concrete suggestions for drafting and prosecuting U.S. patent applications to seek the broadest reasonable claim interpretation while avoiding unpatentability before the PTAB. The panel will offer best practices to solidify novelty, non-obviousness, enablement, and written description positions.



  1. Claim drafting strategies across various fields of technology
  2. Specification drafting strategies
  3. Prosecution strategies
    1. Continuation applications
    2. Carefully prepared declarations
    3. Judicious use of patent profanity to limit reasonability of broadest claim construction, at least in certain embodiments


The panel will review these and other key issues:

  • How can practitioners draft and prosecute patent applications and claims to minimize the threat and/or efficacy of a third-party's post-grant challenges?
  • How can patent owners obtain broad claims to keep competitors at bay while countering attempts to render those broad claims unpatentable under the broadest reasonable interpretation standard before the PTAB?
  • How can practitioners introduce substantial grounds for patentability under Sections 102, 103, and 112 in the specification and prosecution history in the hopes that IPRs and PGRs are either denied or otherwise ineffective against the challenged instituted claims?


Burgy, Adriana
Adriana L. Burgy

Finnegan Henderson Farabow Garrett & Dunner

Ms. Burgy focuses on opinion work, client counseling, patent prosecution and management, and litigation in the...  |  Read More

Irving, Thomas
Thomas L. Irving

Finnegan Henderson Farabow Garrett & Dunner

Mr. Irving has 35 years of experience in the field of IP law. His practice includes due diligence, patent prosecution,...  |  Read More

Gutowski, Anthony
Anthony M. Gutowski

Finnegan Henderson Farabow Garrett & Dunner

Mr. Gutowski focuses on client counseling, patent procurement, and patent enforcement. He advises clients on patent...  |  Read More

Lu, Jia
Jia W. Lu

Finnegan Henderson Farabow Garrett & Dunner

Ms. Lu focuses on patent litigation, patent prosecution, and client counseling in the fields of electrical and computer...  |  Read More

Other Formats
— Anytime, Anywhere

Strafford will process CLE credit for one person on each recording. All formats include program handouts. To find out which recorded format will provide the best CLE option, select your state:

CLE On-Demand Video