News & Analysis as of

Arthrex Inc v Smith & Nephew Inc

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

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2022 Decisions: Polaris Innovations Ltd. v. Brent, 48 F.4th 1365...

NVIDIA petitioned for IPR of two patents owned by Polaris. The Board found the challenged claims unpatentable. Polaris appealed. While on appeal, the final written decisions in those IPRs were vacated and the proceedings were...more

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

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2022 Decisions: Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., 35 F.4th...

Smith & Nephew petitioned for IPR of Arthrex’s ’907 patent, which claims a surgical device with an “eyelet” through which a suture is threaded. Smith & Nephew argued in relevant part that certain claims were anticipated by a...more

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

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2022 Decisions

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

Jones Day

Federal Circuit Approves Interim-Director Director Reviews

Jones Day on

The Federal Circuit’s decision on May 27, 2022 in Arthrex Inc. v. Smith & Nephew Inc. et al., set forth that Patent Commissioner, Drew Hirshfeld, was within the bounds of the U.S. Supreme Court’s United States v. Arthrex...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - May 2022

Knobbe Martens on

Somebody’s Wrong:  PTAB Must Resolve Conflicting Factual Testimony During IPR - In Google LLC v. IPA Technologies Inc., Appeal No. 21-1179, the Federal Circuit held that, for purposes of determining whether a reference was...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

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - May 2022 #4

Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., Appeal No. 2018-2140 (Fed. Cir. May 27, 2022) In a return to the Federal Circuit, this case again sets precedent concerning Patent Office Director review of Patent Trial and Appeal Board...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

Knobbe Martens

Commissioner’s Exercise of Vacant Director’s Duties Does Not Violate Appointments Clause

Knobbe Martens on

ARTHREX, INC. v. SMITH & NEPHEW, INC. Before Moore, Reyna, and Chen.  Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: During vacancies of Director and Deputy Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office,...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Top Three Stories of 2021

After reflecting upon the events of the past twelve months, Patent Docs presents its 15th annual list of top patent stories.  For 2021, we identified nine stories that were covered on Patent Docs last year that we believe had...more

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

Supreme Court: PTAB Judges Unconstitutionally Appointed; Court Gives Director Supervisory Authority

In United States v. Arthrex, Inc., the Supreme Court held that Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) administrative patent judges (APJs) are unconstitutionally appointed. However, the Court resolved the problem by making PTAB...more

Jones Day

PTAB Lifts Arthrex Remand Stay

Jones Day on

On October 26, 2021, Chief Administrative Patent Judge (“APJ”) Boalick lifted a May 1, 2020 stay issued by the PTAB pending the Supreme Court’s consideration of Arthrex in which 103 cases were placed in “administrative...more

WilmerHale

10 Open Appellate Issues Following High Court Arthrex Ruling

WilmerHale on

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

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Finds No Constitutional Defect in Appointment of TTAB Judges

Knobbe Martens on

PIANO FACTORY GROUP, INC. v. SCHIEDMAYER CELESTA GMBH - Before Prost, Bryson, and Stoll. Appeal from the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: The appointments of TTAB judges do not share the constitutional defect...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Arthrex's Fallout - How is the Supreme Court Decision Affecting Appeals?

Foley & Lardner LLP on

The Supreme Court rendered its decision in Arthrex v. Smith & Nephew back in June and now the impact of that decision is becoming more clear. Arthrex had challenged the constitutionality of the appointment of administrative...more

WilmerHale

CAFC Patent Cases - August 2021 #2

WilmerHale on

Precedential Federal Circuit Opinions - SEABED GEOSOLUTIONS (US) INC. v. MAGSEIS FF LLC [OPINION] (2020-1237, August 11, 2021) (MOORE, LINN and CHEN) - Moore, Chief Judge. Vacating final written decision of the Patent...more

Jones Day

Post-Arthrex PTAB Appeals Mostly Moving On From Constitutional Kerfuffle

Jones Day on

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

Jones Day

NEWS: USPTO Issues First Director Review Decisions

Jones Day on

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

Morrison & Foerster LLP - Federal Circuitry

Arthrex Looks to Be Going Out With a Whimper

Now that it’s been roughly a month since the Federal Circuit issued mass sua sponte Arthrex orders (which we discussed in Early Hints About What Happens Next After Arthrex), we thought it was worth checking in on what’s...more

Jones Day

USPTO updates Arthrex Q&As

Jones Day on

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

Jones Day

JONES DAY TALKS®: Supreme Court Rules on Constitutionality of Administrative Patent Judges

Jones Day on

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

Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck

“Unreviewable Authority” by APJs During Inter Partes Review Struck Down

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

Jones Day

Boardside Chat Sheds Light On Arthrex Director Review Procedure

Jones Day on

In its July 1st Boardside Chat, the PTAB discussed the Supreme Court’s recent Arthrex decision and the interim procedure for Director review.  The panel included Drew Hirschfeld (Performing the functions and duties of the...more

Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati

The PTAB Review - July 2021

This issue of The PTAB Review begins with a brief summary of the U.S. Supreme Court’s most recent pronouncement about America Invents Act (AIA) reviews. It then provides an update on the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s...more

Miller Canfield

Supreme Court Adds New Wrinkle to Patent Inter Partes Review Proceedings, But Actual Impact Remains Unclear

Miller Canfield on

A recent Supreme Court decision could add a new dimension to the patentability review process before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. On June 21, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court decided United States v. Arthrex, Inc.,...more

92 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 4

"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