Podcast: Texas v. United States of America
On March 1, 2021, the Supreme Court heard the oral argument in Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., No. 19-1434. Two questions are before the Court. First, whether under the Appointments Clause, U.S. Const. Art. II, § 2,...more
When oral arguments commence in United States v. Arthrex, Inc., No. 19-1434 (U.S.) on Monday, March 1, William H. Milliken, a director in Sterne Kessler’s Trial & Appellate Practice Group, will be live tweeting updates from...more
In October 2020, the Supreme Court agreed to review the Federal Circuit’s holding in Arthrex Inc. v. Smith & Nephew Inc., 941 F.3d 1320 (Fed. Cir. 2019), that the scheme for appointing the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s...more
Now that the Supreme Court has granted cert in Arthrex v. Smith & Nephew, patent owners and petitioners alike may be wondering what ramifications the Court’s decision may have on their proceedings. In this article, we...more
The Supreme Court recently granted three petitions for certiorari challenging the Federal Circuit’s holding in Arthrex v. Smith & Nephew that administrative patent judges of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) are...more
The Supreme Court of the United States agreed to consider whether Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) judges are unconstitutionally appointed. The United States of America v. Arthrex, Inc., Case Nos. 19-1452, -1458, -1459...more
While all eyes have been trained on the confirmation hearings from last week, the Supreme Court made news in the IP world. The Court granted certiorari in Arthrex v. Smith & Nephew (Nos. 19-1434, -1452, -1458), a decision...more
The US Supreme Court has granted certiorari in three cases relating to the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s controversial October 2019 decision in Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc. In Arthrex, the Federal...more
Are PTAB judges constitutional? This week the Supreme Court granted certiorari to answer this question. In Arthrex v. Smith & Nephew, the Federal Circuit considered whether the appointment of administrative patent judges...more
Maybe it was the end of summer and the start of fall, or the kids (kind of) going back to school. But whatever it was, last week the Court issued only one precedential decision, in a veteran’s benefits case. All said, the...more
Arthrex recently filed a(nother) certiorari petition with the Supreme Court, this time in Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., which has also been the subject of petitions from the U.S. government and Smith & Nephew. (This...more
Federal Circuit Extends Arthrex to Patent Prosecution - This week, the Federal Circuit extended its holding in Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., that administrative patent judges ("APJs") were improperly appointed in...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 March 23, 2020, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ("CAFC") issued a per curiam order denying all filed petitions for rehearing en banc and panel rehearing in Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc. No. 18-2140...more
Since the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s inception, it has faced questions regarding its constitutionality. This past year was no different. In 2019, aggrieved patent owners raised numerous constitutional challenges...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
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
The only real answers we are hearing from the patent community is that no one knows what to do or what might happen next --- post Arthrex. As a quick reminder – the Federal Circuit ruled (1) the current PTAB judges were...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
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
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