Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/19pdf/18-916_f2ah.pdf
Page Number: 17

14 

THRYV, INC. v. CLICK-TO-CALL TECHNOLOGIES, LP 

Opinion of the Court 

V 
Click-to-Call  presses  an  alternative  reason  why  the
Board’s ruling on its §315(b) objection is appealable.  The 
Board’s final written decision addressed the §315(b) issue,
so  Click-to-Call  argues  that  it  may  appeal  under  §319, 
which  authorizes  appeal  from  the  final  written  decision. 
But even labeled as an appeal from the final written deci-
sion, Click-to-Call’s attempt to overturn the Board’s §315(b) 
ruling is still barred by §314(d).  Because §315(b)’s sole of-
fice  is  to  govern  institution,  Click-to-Call’s  contention  re-
mains, essentially, that the agency should have refused to
institute inter partes review.  As explained, §314(d) makes
that contention unreviewable. 

* 

* 
For  the  reasons  stated,  we  vacate  the  judgment  of  the
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and
remand the case with instructions to dismiss for lack of ap-
pellate jurisdiction. 

* 

It is so ordered. 

—————— 
courts  alike  will  just  have  to  wait  and  see.”).   Lest  any  “confusion” re-
main, post, at 17, we reaffirm today our holding in Cuozzo: Section 314(d) 
generally precludes appeals of the agency’s institution decision, includ-
ing, beyond genuine debate, appeals “consist[ing] of questions that are 
closely tied to the application and interpretation of statutes related to”
the institution decision.  579 U. S., at ___, ___ (slip op., at 7, 11).  The 
appeal bar, we therefore reiterate, is not limited to the agency’s applica-
tion of §314(a).