ARTICLE
12 June 2026

Director Denies IPR Over Foreign Government RPI Ties

JD
Jones Day

Contributor

Jones Day is a global law firm with more than 2,500 lawyers across five continents. The Firm is distinguished by a singular tradition of client service; the mutual commitment to, and the seamless collaboration of, a true partnership; formidable legal talent across multiple disciplines and jurisdictions; and shared professional values that focus on client needs.
The Director issued a precedential discretionary denial on the ground that a foreign government entity was an undisclosed real party in interest (“RPI”). The ruling extended Return Mail...
United States Intellectual Property
Jones Day are most popular:
  • within Strategy topic(s)

Visit the PTAB Litigation Blog

The Director issued a precedential discretionary denial on the ground that a foreign government entity was an undisclosed real party in interest (“RPI”). The ruling extended Return Mail, Inc. v. United States Postal Service, 587 U.S. 618 (2019)—which barred federal agencies from petitioning for AIA post-issuance review—to include foreign governments.

LG Display Co., Ltd. (“Patent Owner”) argued that Tianma Microelectronics Co., Ltd., Tianma Microelectronics (HONG KONG) Limited, and Wuhan Tianma Microelectronics Co., Ltd. (collectively “Petitioner”) failed to disclose several RPIs, including a foreign government entity. Patent Owner argued that Tianma Microelectronics Co., Ltd. (“Tianma”) is a subsidiary of Aviation Industry Corporation of China (“AVIC”). Tianma’s Corporate Disclosure Statement identified AVIC Innovation Holding Limited (“AVIC Innovation”) as owning 10% or more of Tianma’s stock, and Patent Owner provided evidence that AVIC owns AVIC Innovation and Tianma. Patent Owner further showed that AVIC appears on the Department of Commerce’s “entity list”—parties involved in activities contrary to U.S. national security or foreign policy interests. Petitioner countered that none of the identified entities funded, controlled, or directed the IPR.

Read the full article at ptablitigationblog.com.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

[View Source]

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More