As of Sept. 30, 2022, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) retired decades-old search and viewing tools, many of which were accessed on a daily basis by inventors, assignees, applicants and patent...more
In a split decision, the United States Supreme Court ruled on June 21, 2021, in United States v. Arthrex, that administrative patent judges (APJs) are not constitutionally permitted to wield “unreviewable authority” during...more
7/9/2021
/ Administrative Patent Judges ,
Appointments Clause ,
Arthrex Inc v Smith & Nephew Inc ,
Executive Branch ,
Executive Powers ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
SCOTUS ,
United States v Arthrex Inc ,
USPTO
Fostering and supporting innovation is, quite literally, the mission of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). To advance this mission, the USPTO hosts a suite of web portals that empowers patent applicants,...more
11/21/2019
/ Corporate Counsel ,
Global Dossier ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
IP License ,
Patent Applications ,
Patent Examinations ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Popular ,
USPTO ,
World Intellectual Property Organisation ,
Young Lawyers
In a surprising precedential ruling, with the potential to vacate past decisions by administrative patent judges (“APJs”) of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”), the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled...more
11/7/2019
/ Administrative Patent Judges ,
Appointments Clause ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Final Written Decisions ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Lucia v SEC ,
Patent Act ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Post-Grant Review ,
Precedential Opinion ,
Remand ,
Secretary of Commerce ,
Vacated