USPTO Director Scolds VLSI for Publicly Citing Anonymous Report on PQA-Intel Connection

Kathi Vidal, director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), said in an order filed yesterday between Patent Quality Assurance (PQA)/Intel and VLSI Technology in IPR2021-01229 that VLSI’s reconsideration request was , said it was an “unsolicited, anonymous, inappropriate example”. The “parte communication” about his PQA-Intel relationship that Vidal has sealed puts VLSI on thin ice and puts it in danger of being sanctioned.

IP watchdog article

The instructions have been redacted but ostensibly refer repeatedly to IPWatchdog’s blog post published on 15 February 2023. The article references anonymous documents filed with the House Oversight Committee detailing Intel’s relationship with PQA. IP Watchdog was unable to verify any of the claims made in its document and remains neutral on the issue, but in that article, IP Watchdog founder and CEO Jean Quinn stated that the USPTO has never said it had not responded to a separate December 2022 FOIA request from IP Watchdog. Relationship between PQA and Intel.

However, recent communications from the USPTO indicate that these documents may eventually be published soon.

“I can confirm that our long-awaited FOIA remains pending,” said Quinn. “I was told that the document in response to my request was found in December 2022, but for some reason had to be sent to the Department of Commerce for comment and consideration. ‘s estimate is that the USPTO hopes to issue a “provisional response” to the FOIA request by the end of this week. ”

Quinn explained in an article of February 15 that the ruling by Director Vidal dated February 9, 2023 referred to two separate pieces of evidence that were sealed and presented only for the parties and the Board. 3029 and Ex. 3030—and related to several documents “owned by several members of the House Oversight Committee, several additional staff members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and the USPTO’s Patent Ombuds Office.” Quinn added:

“As of yet, Secretary Vidal’s February 9 order has been criticized, especially considering that nearly 10 weeks have passed since the USPTO completed its search for documents in response to the FOIA request and no documents have been provided. And it raises far more questions than it answers.I feel like I still have a lot to learn about the relationship between PQA and Intel.The reason why so many questions openly swirl is the PTAB. It relates to confidential submissions to, undisclosed whistleblower complaints, and long overdue FOIA requests.”

Vidal: It’s safe for now, but please don’t do it again.

VLSI, in response to Vidal’s February 23, 2023 reasoned order, asked why she should not be sanctioned for including information she specified to the parties and the Board only in the request for reconsideration. said about IPWatchdog’s blog post and possibly her March 1, 2023 breitbart article. Vidal objected to this, stating that VLSI’s statement and the statement made in his IPWatchdog article were not equivalent (VLSI’s exact statement is unclear as it has been redacted). breitbart Considering the article was published, the article was “misplaced” rear A petition for reconsideration has been filed.

Despite Vidal’s disagreements with VLSI, she did not go so far as to impose sanctions. But she said, “I strongly warn you.[ed]VLSI refrained from citing information contained in Exhibit 3030 that contained “inappropriate” unsolicited communications, stating, “Why should VLSI not be sanctioned and should pay a compensation fee if it repeats similar behavior?” I will issue an order showing another reason as to whether.” to PQA and/or Intel. ”

Vidal granted director review of the IPR filed against VLSI by PQA in June 2022, and both parties have been engaged in an ongoing bitter battle ever since.

Image Source: Deposit Photo
Image ID: 13918518
Author: Willie Cole