Dell Inc. v. Acceleron, LLC, IPR2013-00400, Paper 49 (PTAB Aug. 22, 2016). The Federal Circuit faulted the Board for relying on new arguments presented at the oral hearing to find that two challenged claims were obvious. On remand, the Board reversed its determination that those claims are obvious because the information set forth in the petition did not demonstrate that all the limitations of those claims were disclosed in the prior art. The Board also refused to consider new arguments and a new claim construction set forth in petitioner’s reply because petitioner had not presented the arguments and construction in its petition, and the new arguments and construction were not responsive to arguments of patent owner.