Even if it fails, the content of the blog post might lead to other published material that does qualify as prior art.
Also, the proposed prior art has to be "published." Publication means that it is (somehow and reasonably) available to the public.
It concluded that the challenger bore the burden of showing that the facts it relied upon had been established by clear and convincing evidence.
Importantly, PGR is available only for patents filed after March 2013 under the "first-to-file" system.
Despite the limited temporal availability, PGRs may challenge a patent's validity based on a broad range of grounds, including unpatentable subject matter, inadequate description, lack of novelty and obviousness.
Unlike IPR, PGR has a limited window of availability and applies only to newer patents.
A PGR must be initiated within nine months of a patent's grant or reissue, and it can only be initiated by a party that has not previously challenged the patent civilly.
I have lots of ideas and, not expecting them to be unique or profitable (or knowing how to profit from them), I discuss them online, expecting the information to be helpful to others or expecting others to help me develop them further.
Later, I've found very similar ideas patented at a date after my public discussions.
Think of it this way: the bargain the government offers to an inventor is exclusive rights to his invention in exchange to revealing that invention (which would presumably remain secret otherwise) to the public.
If the invention is already known to the public - because it has been published - then the inventor is not upholding his end of the deal.
The United States legal system recognizes three different standards of proof that may be required in different situations.
In criminal proceedings it is normally required that the prosecution establishes the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt.
CBM provides a targeted mechanism for challenging "business method" patents, which to date are the most common patent type asserted by NPEs.