JONES DAY TALKS®: Supreme Court Rules on Constitutionality of Administrative Patent Judges
Chief Justice John Roberts has issued a temporary stay of a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia that barred the Trump Administration from firing members of two independent agency boards....more
The termination of NLRB Member Gwynne Wilcox is back in place, at least for the time being. Earlier this month, Judge Beryl A. Howell issued an injunction that blocked President Trump and Marvin Kaplan, Chairman of the...more
The president’s dismissal of two Democrat Commissioners of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) continued his unprecedented attempts at reshaping federal agencies to better carry out his agenda – but what does it mean for...more
Saying that independent agencies “have exercised enormous power over the American people without Presidential oversight,” President Trump has issued an Executive Order placing those agencies under his control....more
On October 21, 2024, the Supreme Court declined to hear a challenge to the structure of the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). As we explained in a previous blog post, under CPSC’s current structure, the president of...more
“Entering office with four years of on-the-job training this time around, President-elect Trump and his advisors have a much better sense of how to manipulate the levers of government power – and they intend to push the...more
The Cozen Lens- · The second Trump term will be very different from the first. President-elect Trump and his team will enter office more prepared to enact much of their agenda through an aggressive expansion of executive...more
Whenever there is a pot of money up for grabs, people will inevitably want more than their fair share. And when that money is doled out through government contracts, opportunities for fraud abound. The government can...more
Years from now, might we cite a recent Middle District of Florida decision as the beginning of the end of the False Claim Act’s (FCA) qui tam provision in its current form? In granting the defendants’ motion for judgment on...more
On September 15th, 2024, the Mexican Congress published on the Diario Oficial de la Federacion (Mexican Official Gazette) a decree to amend, add, and abolish several provisions of the Mexican Constitution regarding the...more
It’s not just the New York Yankees that wish they could put the summer behind them. We previously wrote about the shocking blow the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals dealt FINRA in early July by enjoining the self-regulatory...more
In June 2021, the Supreme Court issued its decision in U.S. v. Arthrex, Inc., Nos. 19-1434, 19-1452, 19-1458 (June 21, 2021) (slip opinion). Authored by Chief Justice Roberts, the Court ruled that the statutory scheme...more
Arthrex appealed a final written decision from an inter partes review (IPR) where the U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) found all challenged claims of its patent anticipated. On appeal, Arthrex argued that the...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
Year-End Analysis and Future Forecasts on the Most Significant Developments Impacting Post-Grant Proceedings. Attend ACI’s inaugural PTAB Practice Briefing virtually on December 2nd for in-depth discussions and year-end...more
On June 21, 2021 the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in U.S. v. Arthrex Inc. Two questions were before the court. First, are administrative patent judges principal officers who must be appointed by the president...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
This is a follow up to our earlier post about the fallout from the Supreme Court’s June 21, 2021 decision in U.S. v. Arthrex, holding that PTAB APJs were unconstitutionally appointed because they exercised “principal...more
Following the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Arthrex, the Federal Circuit issued requests for briefing regarding the decision’s impact in pending PTAB appeals in which an Appointments Clause challenge had been...more
On July 6th and 7th, the USPTO made good on its promise to not wait for a confirmed director to begin Arthrex Director reviews, issuing its first denials of review requests. The full press release is below:...more
[co-author: Jay Bober, Summer Associate] 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...more
The long-awaited decision in United States v. Arthrex held that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) is inconsistent with the Constitution’s Appointments Clause because the administrative patent judges (APJs) that...more
On July 20th, the PTAB provided additional clarifications regarding its views on Arthrex and how its interim procedures for requesting Director review will work for cases receiving Final Written Decisions on a going forward...more
The United States Supreme Court has delivered its decision in U.S. v. Arthrex, which determined whether appointments of administrative patent judges to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board...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