News & Analysis as of

Appeals Appointments Clause United States Patent and Trademark Office

McDermott Will & Schulte

An Odyssey of Timeliness: Appointments Clause Arguments Must Be Preserved

Citing forfeiture, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld the dismissal of a complaint against the US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO). The complaint sought director review of a 2018 Patent Trial & Appeal Board...more

McDermott Will & Schulte

Review Delayed Is Not Review Denied

Considering whether the US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO) Director must complete review of the Patent Trial & Appeal Board’s (Board) inter partes review (IPR) decision within the statutory deadline for a final written...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

PTAB Strategies and Insights Newsletter: May 2022: Short Take: Latest Arthrex Update

On Friday May 27, 2022, the Federal Circuit added another opinion to the Arthrex line of cases. As a short refresher, Arthrex was back at the Federal Circuit after being remanded to the Board for Director Review after Patent...more

Fitch, Even, Tabin & Flannery LLP

Commissioner of Patents Had Authority to Review IPRs While Moonlighting as USPTO Director

On May 27, in Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., the Federal Circuit agreed that the Commissioner for Patents, performing the duties of the Director of the USPTO, had the authority to decide a request for rehearing of a...more

McDermott Will & Schulte

Arthrex, Still Without Director Review, Gets Constitutional Review from Patent Commissioner

A panel of the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit considered whether the Patent Commissioner, on assuming the role of the US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO) Director, can constitutionally evaluate the rehearing of...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

PTAB Strategies and Insights Newsletter: May 2022

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

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2021 Decisions

[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

Fitch, Even, Tabin & Flannery LLP

PTAB’s Structure and Funding Pass Due Process Muster

On October 13, in Mobility Workx v. Unified Patents, LLC, the Federal Circuit rejected a series of due process challenges to the structure of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), leaving the PTAB to continue with...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

PTAB Strategies and Insights - October 2021

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

Foley & Lardner LLP

Carr v. Saul – Has the Court Tired of Issue Exhaustion? Potential Effects on Arthrex

Foley & Lardner LLP on

On April 22, 2021, the Supreme Court decided Carr v. Saul, a case with interesting parallels to Arthrex, which deals with appointments clause challenges to the PTAB judges and which will be decided later this Term. In Carr,...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2020 Decisions

[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

Foley & Lardner LLP

PTAB Waits as Supreme Court Considers Arthrex Certiorari Petitions

Foley & Lardner LLP on

It has been almost eleven months since the Federal Circuit held in Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., 941 F.3d 1320, that PTAB judges were principal officers appointed in violation of the Constitution, and held that the...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

U.S. Government Petitions for Certiorari in Arthrex Case

Last fall, the Federal Circuit decided in Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc. that Administrative Patent Judges (APJs) serving on the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) were principal officers and thus had been improperly...more

McDermott Will & Schulte

Arthrex Extended to Inter Partes Re-examination

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied a petition for panel rehearing regarding the constitutionality of decisions issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Patent Trial and Appeal Board...more

McDermott Will & Schulte

“Waive” Goodbye to Belated Argument that Administrative Patent Judges’ Appointment is Unconstitutional

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

Sunstein LLP

Federal Circuit Averts Huge Disruption to the Patent System by Fashioning a Cure to the Status of Administrative Judges

Sunstein LLP on

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

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Federal Circuit Denies Rehearing En Banc in Arthrex

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

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Intellectual Property Outlook: Cases and Trends to Follow in 2020 — Part 3

In this four-part series, we take a look forward at the cases, legislation, and other trends that are likely to have a significant impact on intellectual property law and practice in 2020. In the first two parts of the...more

Jones Day

Update: Parties, Government Seek Rehearing in Arthrex

Jones Day on

January 17 Update: On January 17, each of the parties filed responses to the rehearing petitions - As we have previously discussed on this blog and elsewhere, the Federal Circuit’s decision in Arthrex v. Smith & Nephew...more

Jones Day

Updates on Arthrex Developments

Jones Day on

The Federal Circuit and the patent world continues to grapple with the court’s decision in Arthrex v. Smith & Nephew.  Since our last updates, the parties in Arthrex and other cases have continued the push for en banc...more

Jones Day

Timeline of Arthrex Developments

Jones Day on

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

McDermott Will & Schulte

Principal or Inferior? PTAB APJ Appointment Held Unconstitutional

McDermott Will & Schulte on

In what has quickly turned into a controversial decision, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held the appointment of administrative patent judges (APJs) at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Federal Circuit Finds the Appointment of PTAB Judges Unconstitutional and Provides Remedial Solution

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

23 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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.
- hide
- hide