Arthrex Is Not for Everyone

Troutman Pepper
Contact

Pepper Hamilton LLP

Ciena Corp. v. Oyster Optics, LLC, Appeal No. 2019-2117 (Fed. Cir., May 5, 2020).

On January 28, 2020, the Federal Circuit issued a non-precedential order that denied IPR petitioner Ciena’s motion to have a judgment vacated and remanded under Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., 941 F.3d 1320 (Fed. Cir. 2019). The order was made precedential on May 5, 2020.

Ciena was unsuccessful in its challenge to Oyster’s U.S. Patent No. 8,913,898, which is related to a transceiver card for a telecommunication box. Ciena filed an appeal, and moved for a vacatur and remand.

The Federal Circuit denied Ciena’s motion on the grounds that Ciena waived or forfeited an Arthrex Appointments Clause challenge because Ciena consented to the jurisdiction of the PTAB. Slip op. at 6-7. The Federal Circuit stated that although it had the ability to “forgive waiver or forfeiture,” such forgiveness is discretionary and should only rarely be done. Id. at 6.   The Federal Circuit chose not to forgive and denied the motion.

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Troutman Pepper | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Troutman Pepper
Contact
more
less

Troutman Pepper on:

Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
- hide
- hide