JONES DAY TALKS®: Supreme Court Rules on Constitutionality of Administrative Patent Judges
JONES DAY TALKS®: Appointments of PTAB Judges Ruled Unconstitutional ... What Now?
As part of the recovery from the global COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit took steps to return to normal operations. It began requiring live oral arguments in August 2022 and, by November,...more
[co-author: Jamie Dohopolski] Last year, the continued global COVID-19 pandemic forced American courts to largely continue the procedures set in place in 2020. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was no...more
On November 1, 2021, the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office granted the first “Director review” to Samsung SDI Co. Director review is a new interim procedure that allows a party to seek review of a final written...more
In a recent decision, Commissioner Andrew Hirschfeld, who is currently performing the functions and duties of the Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the USPTO, issued the first post-Arthrex...more
The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return on investment for all stakeholders looking at the entire...more
The U.S. Supreme Court’s opinion in United States v. Arthrex has shaken up the Patent Trial and Appeals Board but will likely have little effect on case outcomes. Arthrex involved a challenge to the constitutionality of the...more
The availability of post-grant proceedings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has changed the face of patent litigation. This monthly digest is designed to keep you up-to-date by highlighting interesting PTAB,...more
In this second edition of Orrick’s quarterly series on the PTAB, we summarize the Arthrex decision, walk through the PTO’s post-Arthrex interim procedure for reviewing PTAB decisions, and discuss potential post-Arthrex...more
On June 29th, the PTO issued an initial protocol for requesting Director review of a PTAB Final Written Decision according to the Supreme Court’s Arthrex decision. This Arthrex protocol is similar to the current procedure...more
[co-author: Kathleen Wills] Last year, the global COVID-19 pandemic created unprecedented challenges for American courts. By making several changes, however, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was able to...more
The authors propose replacing the PTAB’s current NHK-Fintiv factors with the alternative “Babcock-Train Factors” set forth herein These alternative factors have been crafted in an effort to provide clearer institution...more
Unconstitutionally Appointed Judges Cannot Decide Ex Parte Appeals - In In Re Boloro Global Limited, Appeal No. 19-2349, When administrative patent judges are unconstitutionally appointed, their decisions in ex...more
IPR Petitioners May Not Raise Appointments Clause Challenges Under Arthrex - In CIENA CORPORATION v. OYSTER OPTICS, LLC, Appeal No. 19-2117, affirmatively petitioning for IPR waived the petitioner’s Appointments Clause...more
Addressing whether a party can waive a challenge to the constitutionality of Administrative Patent Judges’ (APJs’) appointment, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that the issue is non-jurisdictional and...more
By recognizing a constitutional deficiency in the appointment of Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) judges, the Federal Circuit in Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., 941 F.3d 1320 (Fed. Cir. 2019) set the stage for...more
On May 5, 2020 the Federal Circuit formally barred petitioners from seeking Arthrex remands. The Court issued a precedential order clarifying that only qualifying patent owners may seek the Arthrex remedy. Petitioners, unlike...more
In October 2019, a Federal Circuit panel concluded that the status of Administrative Patent Judges (APJs) on the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) violated the Appointments...more
On May 1, 2020, the Chief Administrative Patent Judge for the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) issued a General Order administratively holding in abeyance all cases remanded from the United States Court of Appeals for...more
Last fall, the Federal Circuit held in Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc. that the way the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) had appointed administrative patent judges (“APJs”) to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board...more
The Federal Circuit continues to be flooded with petitions to revisit its panel decision in Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., 941 F.3d 1320, No. 2018-2140 (Fed. Cir. 2019). As previously discussed, all three parties in...more
On January 31, 2020, the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) final written decision in view of Arthrex, but did so reluctantly because it disagreed with the merits and questioned the...more
Arthrex appealed a final written decision from an inter partes review (IPR) where the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) found all challenged claims of its patent anticipated. On appeal, Arthrex argued for the first time...more
Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati is pleased to present our 2019 PTAB Year in Review. We begin the 2019 PTAB Year in Review with a review of 2019 petition filings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and then take a...more
The Appointments Clause: Ensuring That PTAB Decisions Are Subject to Constitutional Checks and Balances In Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., Appeal No. 18-2251, the Federal Circuit ruled that, under the then-existing...more
The Federal Circuit’s decision in Arthrex v. Smith & Nephew excited and disrupted the patent world... Inter partes review (IPR) reshaped patent law and patent litigation this decade after the America Invents Act took effect....more