Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/19pdf/18-916_f2ah.pdf
Page Number: 14.0

Cite as:  590 U. S. ____ (2020) 

11 

Opinion of the Court 

The text of §314(d) offers Click-to-Call no support.  The 
provision  sweeps  more  broadly  than  the  determination 
about whether “there is a reasonable likelihood that the pe-
titioner  would  prevail.”  §314(a).    Rather,  it  encompasses
the  entire  determination  “whether  to  institute  an  inter 
partes review.”  §314(d).

And §314(d) refers not to a determination under subsec-
tion (a), but to the determination “under this section.”  That 
phrase  indicates  that  §314  governs  the  Director’s  institu-
tion  of  inter  partes  review.  Titled  “Institution  of  inter 
partes review,” §314 is the section housing the command to 
the  Director  to  “determine  whether  to  institute  an  inter 
partes review,” §314(b).  Thus, every decision to institute is
made “under” §314 but must take account of specifications
in other provisions—such as the §312(a)(3) particularity re-
quirement at issue in Cuozzo and the §315(b) timeliness re-
quirement at issue here.  Similar clarifying language recurs 
throughout the AIA.  See, e.g., §315(c) (referring to the Di-
rector’s determination regarding “the institution of an inter 
partes review under section 314” (emphasis added)); §314(b) 
(referring to “a petition filed under section 311,” the section 
authorizing  the  filing  of  petitions  (emphasis  added));
§314(b)(1) (referring to “a preliminary response to the peti-
tion under section 313,” the section authorizing the filing of 
preliminary responses to petitions (emphasis added)). 

If Congress had intended Click-to-Call’s meaning, it had 
at hand readymade language from a precursor to §314(d):
“A determination by the Director under subsection (a) shall 
be final and non-appealable.”  35 U. S. C. §312(c) (2006 ed.) 
(emphasis  added)  (governing  inter  partes  reexamination). 
Or Congress might have borrowed from a related provision:
“A determination by the Director pursuant to subsection (a) 
of this section that no substantial new question of patenta-
bility has been raised will be final and nonappealable.”  35 
U. S. C. §303(c) (emphasis added) (governing ex parte reex-