PROPOSED CONSTRUCTIONS OF NEW CLAIM TERMS NECESSARY FOR MOTION TO AMEND

In Tandus Flooring, Inc. v. Interface, Inc., IPR2013-00527, PTAB denied a patent owner's motion to amend a claim because the patent owner failed to propose constructions for new claim terms.  In this case, the patent owner, Interface Inc., tried to amend a reviewed claim likely invalidated by cited prior art and to add new claim terms to overcome the prior art.  In its motion to amend the claim, Interface failed to propose constructions for the new claim terms.  Denying the motion to amend, PTAB determined that "without a reasonable construction of [] alleged new claim term feature in proposed claim [], patent owner does not provide adequate information for us to determine whether patent owner's proposed substitute claim is patentable over the prior art generally."