June 21, 2021
IP Law Daily
IP Law Daily interviewed Finnegan partner Joshua Goldberg for his reaction to the Supreme Court of the United States’ decision in United States v. Arthrex, Inc. The Court ruled that the appointment of Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) administrative patent judges (APJs) is unconstitutional under the U.S. Constitution’s appointments clause.
Josh said, “We know that Arthrex is not entitled to a hearing before a new panel of APJs. We also know that the appropriate remedy is a remand to the acting director for him to decide whether to rehear the petition filed by Smith & Nephew. But the ruling does not require the director to review every decision of the PTAB. It remains to be seen what additional review by the director will look like and which cases the director will choose to review."
Arthrex v. Smith & Nephew , United States v. Arthrex, Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS), Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), administrative patent judge (APJ)
Press Release
July 23, 2026
Commentary
PTAB Filings Down 81% in Q2 2026 as Patent Challengers Abandon IPR Playbook
July 13, 2026
Commentary
Patent Strategy Could Shape Financing, Valuation and Risk in Offshore Energy Projects
June 30, 2026
Award/Ranking
Finnegan’s European Practices and Attorneys Highlighted in 2026 Managing IP Rankings
June 25, 2026
Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.