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
This document provides a factual overview of the Federal Circuit’s decision in Arthrex v. Smith & Nephew, discusses the court’s remedy, and addresses implications for litigants with Patent Trial and Appeal Board cases pending...more
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
In Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., the Federal Circuit held that appointment of Administrative Patent Judges (APJs) by the Secretary of Commerce violates the Appointments Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The court then...more
Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., Appeal No. 2018-2140 (Fed. Cir., October 31, 2019) - Since the inception of inter partes review at the Patent Trial and Appeals Board (PTAB), there have been a number of...more
Yesterday, in Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., a panel of the Federal Circuit unanimously held that the appointment scheme for the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) Administrative Patent Judges (APJ) is...more