直 Japanese PDF Font
  • Our Professionals
  • Our Work
  • Our Insights
  • Offices
  • Firm
  • Careers
Finnegan
  • News
  • Finnegan Facts
  • History
    • Finnegan VISION
    • Finnegan FORWARD
  • Pro Bono
  • Management
    • Pricing & Alternative Fee Arrangements
    • AFA Models We Offer
    • Contingency Fees
    • AI + KM

Commentary

Why SCOTUS Took on Arthrex – and What Could Happen Next

October 19, 2020

Managing Intellectual Property

The Supreme Court of the United States’ (SCOTUS) decision to hear Arthrex v Smith & Nephew and decide whether administrative patent judges are constitutional was no surprise to many intellectual property practitioners. Many lawyers believe that the high court took on the case to correct the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s decision and to set the criteria for what constitutes a superior officer or an inferior officer. Managing Intellectual Property interviewed Finnegan partner and leader of the firm’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Section, Joshua Goldberg, for his perspective on how the SCOTUS decision may be affected if Congress issues a legislative fix before the ruling.

Joshua does not believe there is a sense of urgency from Congress to act on this issue now, particularly considering other priorities the government is currently dealing with. He said, “I wouldn’t count on it getting done any time soon considering the state of affairs in government right now. I certainly won’t be placing any bets.”

Read the full article here.

Tags

Arthrex v. Smith & Nephew , Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS)

Related Practices

Federal Circuit and Supreme Court Appeals

Patent Office Invalidation Proceedings

PTAB Invalidation Proceedings: IPR and PGR

Related Offices

Washington, DC

Related Professionals

Joshua L. Goldberg
Partner
Reston, VA
+1 202 408 6092
Email

Related News

Commentary

East Texas Reclaims Its Patent Crown

August 21, 2026

Commentary

Early Test of USPTO's Ex Parte Preorder Filing Leads to Re-Exam Denial

August 21, 2026

Award/Ranking

31 Finnegan Attorneys Recognized by Best Lawyers 2027

August 20, 2026

Commentary

Why Global IP Litigants Keep Turning to English Courts

August 19, 2026

Press Release

USPTO Denies Super Lighting Reexamination Request Following PVTECH Pre-Order Submission Under New USPTO Procedure

August 19, 2026

Press Release

Federal Circuit Overrules Precedent En Banc in Finnegan Pro Bono Victory for Federally Employed Veterans

August 18, 2026

Commentary

Fed. Circ. Overrules Precedent on Veteran Hiring Protections

August 14, 2026

Award/Ranking

Fourteen Finnegan Attorneys Named to the 2026 IAM Strategy 300 List

August 13, 2026

Commentary

UK Patent Document Access Rules Raise Secrecy Concerns

August 12, 2026

Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.

  • Privacy
  • Disclaimer
  • Legal Notices
  • Fraud Alert
  • EEO Statement
  • Cookies
  • Contact Us

© 2026 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP