I outlined the process earlier. The CAFC will review for clear errors etc., and protect the rights of WDDD. Casper may have created an appealable issue by telling counsel for WDDD she did not need to hear them on part 2 of their response. That's fine if she ruled in their favor. However, since the ruling did not go their way it is likely an appealable issue. However, that doesn't mean the ruling gets reversed. The CAFC would likely send the case back to Casper with instructions or guidelines on what to do. Again, that doesn't mean the ruling gets overturned. It means counsel for WDDD may have an opportunity address part 2 of the 101. Is it possible that it changes her mind - yes it's possible - but not likely. The Judge ruled the way she did for whatever reason and likely will do what she can to insure the same outcome. She has her opinion on the case. The CAFC will make sure Casper followed the law and was fair to both parties. That's it. Her decision is a judgment call. She is basing it on her interpretation of other cases and precedent. As long as she can justify her ruling and it is within the law the ruling stands.
That's why these IPRs are bad. It's a tool inserted into the process to slow patent lawsuits under the guise of saving a costly defense. In the past few years, it effectively limited most patent challenges which makes big tech happy, as they are generally the target of these suits.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
