In Conopco, Inc, v, The Procter & Gamble Co., IPR2014-00628, Paper 21 (October 21, 2014) the Board denied inter partes review of claims 1–23 (all of the challenged claims) of U.S. Patent No. 6,649,155.  The Board noted that it has discretion to decline to institute an inter partes review (35 U.S.C. § 314(a)), and that one factor it may take into account when exercising that discretion is whether “the same or substantially the same prior art or arguments previously were presented to the Office.” 35 U.S.C. 325(d).  The Board compared the prior art and arguments raised in the instant petition to those raised in Conopco’s prior inter partes review petition, and determined that the petition raises “substantially the same . . . arguments” that “previously were presented to the Office” in the prior petition.  This was one of several circumstances that informed the Board’s decision to decline to institute review.