In a series of recent filings before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, petitioners including Motorola Solutions, Inc., SAP America, Inc., Google LLC, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., SanDisk Technologies, Inc., Western Digital Technologies, Inc., and HighLevel, Inc. are pressing for writs of mandamus to overturn PTAB denials of inter partes review (IPR) institution. These petitions, docketed between June 23 and September 17, 2025, center on the USPTO’s April 2025 policy pivot under Acting Director Coke Morgan Stewart, which rescinded former Director Kathi Vidal’s 2022 guidance memos and amplified the use of discretionary denials under 35 U.S.C. § 314(a). For patent litigators and post-grant practitioners, these actions offer critical insights into challenging the PTAB’s gatekeeping authority, particularly through the lens of the Apple Inc. v. Fintiv, Inc. framework.

As the Federal Circuit weighs these under the stringent Cheney v. U.S. Dist. Ct. for D.C., 542 U.S. 367 (2004), mandamus standard, outcomes could affect IPR viability amid a reported surge in denials since the guidance shift.

The first three petitions relate primarily to the PTAB’s use of Fintiv factors to deny institution based on parallel district court proceedings, and the retroactive rescission of Vidal’s memos as arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. § 706, and violative of Fifth Amendment due process. Petitioners assert that the memos constituted binding agency policy, which the April 2025 guidance upended without notice-and-comment rulemaking.

Motorola Solutions, Inc. (No. 25-134, filed June 23, 2025): Challenging denials in eight IPRs (IPR2024-01205 et al.) against Stellar, LLC patents, Motorola contends the PTAB erred in prioritizing the patent owner’s “litigation investment” in the Western District of Texas despite Motorola’s Sotera stipulation forgoing those claims in court. The petition frames the guidance withdrawal as an APA violation, seeking mandamus to compel institution and avert irreparable harm from unreviewable enforcement.

SAP America, Inc. (No. 25-132, filed June 2025): SAP attacks the denial of IPR2024-01495 against a Cyandia Inc. patent, alleging the Vidal memos’ “safe harbor” for petitioners filing Sotera stipulations—now retroactively voided—deprived it of a protected liberty interest in merits review.

Google LLC & Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (No. 25-144, filed August 18, 2025): In a joint bid over IPR2024-01464 and -01465 against Cerence Inc. patents, the petitioners argue that Fintiv has transformed into a presumptive denial tool post-rescission.

The next two mandamus petitions, HighLevel and SanDisk, diverge from the prior cases in that they relate to specific substantive issues.

HighLevel, Inc. (No. 25-148, filed August 28, 2025): HighLevel contests denials in IPR2025-00234 and -00235 on grounds that the PTAB’s April 2025 “ineligibility rule”—applying Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 573 U.S. 208 (2014), at institution—exceeds § 314(a)’s scope and denies procedural safeguards. Absent in the Fintiv-focused petitions, this due process challenge posits § 101 as requiring adversarial development, not unilateral gatekeeping, and faults the lack of APA rulemaking. A win could insulate software petitions from eligibility “shortcuts,” reshaping eligibility’s role in post-grant triage.

SanDisk Techs., Inc. & Western Digital Techs., Inc. (No. 25-152, filed September 17, 2025): Titled “Mandamus on Settled Expectations,” this petition challenges denials in IPR2025-00515, -00516, and -00517 against Polaris PowerLED patents. SanDisk invokes a reliance-based due process theory, arguing there is no legal basis for “settled expectations” and therefor the latest guidance upsets precedents on institution factors, imposing unfair surprise on filers.

These petitions, now at five and counting, test the Federal Circuit’s appetite for curbing PTAB discretion amid Acting Director Stewart’s interim administration. Now with John Squires’ recent confirmation we will see if this line of dismissals is to be extended or will itself be tempered.