On May 30, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court held in a unanimous decision that the preemption standard codified in section 1044 (12 U.S.C. § 25b) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (DFA) requires...more
On May 16, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court held in a 7-2 decision that the funding structure of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB” or “Bureau”) complies with the Appropriations Clause of the United States...more
As we’ve written about multiple times, a petition for certiorari from the Federal Circuit’s starkly divided decision in American Axle has been pending at the Supreme Court for some time. Many thought this would be the case...more
Now that we have the Supreme Court’s big decision in Arthrex, which we wrote about here, many of us are wondering what the next steps will look like. We may know sooner rather than later. Today, the Federal Circuit issued a...more
The Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decision Monday in United States v. Arthrex, Inc., Nos. 19-1434, -1452, -1458. Although a majority of the Court held that Congress’s statutory scheme violated the Constitution, the...more
6/22/2021
/ 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
As many readers know, the Supreme Court just granted a petition for certiorari in Minerva Surgical, Inc. v. Hologic, Inc. The case asks the Supreme Court to abolish the doctrine of assignor estoppel. But the Supreme Court...more
At Federal Circuitry blog, we like to check in once in a while on what the Federal Circuit is doing in its orders that don’t get posted on the public website. Those orders often offer nuggets about practice at the Federal...more
11/25/2020
/ Arthrex Inc v Smith & Nephew Inc ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Judicial Review ,
Oral Argument ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Remand ,
SCOTUS ,
Sua Sponte ,
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ,
Vacated ,
Vacatur
At Federal Circuitry blog, we like to check in once in a while on what the Federal Circuit is doing in its orders that don’t get posted on the public website. Those orders often offer nuggets about practice at the Federal...more
9/9/2020
/ § 314(d) ,
§ 315(b) ,
§314(a) ,
§314(b) ,
America Invents Act ,
Appeals ,
Arthrex Inc v Smith & Nephew Inc ,
Attorney's Fees ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Dissenting Opinions ,
FRCP 38 ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Judicial Review ,
Mootness ,
Non-Appealable Decisions ,
Oral Argument ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
SCOTUS ,
Thryv Inc v Click-To-Call Technologies LP ,
Time-Barred Claims ,
Vacated
Brian Matsui, Seth Lloyd, and Samuel Goldstein authored an article for Law360 covering how the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has streamlined its docket and moved oral arguments from the courtroom to conference...more
As courts across the country grapple with the COVID-19 pandemic, the Federal Circuit has streamlined its docket and moved oral arguments from the courtroom to conference calling. Early indications suggest that is changing how...more
After the biggest challenge yet to the Patent and Trademark Office’s popular inter partes review proceedings, the name of the game is largely “same old” for today’s Supreme Court decision in Oil States Energy Services, LLC v....more