January/February 2021
IP Litigator
By J. Derek McCorquindale; Brandon T. Andersen; Daniel C. Cooley
Over a year ago, in late October 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled in Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc. that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB’s) administrative patent judges (APJs) who oversee inter partes review proceedings hold office in violation of the Appointments Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The clause requires that “Officers of the United States” be appointed by the President “with the advice and consent of the Senate.” An exception is made for “inferior officers,” which may be appointed without senate oversight and by either the President, courts of law, or heads of departments, as chosen by Congress. The PTAB APJs are appointed as if they were inferior offices; however, in Arthrex, the Federal Circuit held that the PTAB’s APJs are in fact principal officers due to “[t]he lack of any presidentially-appointed officer who can review, vacate, or correct [their] decisions” and the Secretary’s “limited removal power.” On October 13, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in Arthrex and will now consider whether the PTAB’s APJs were unconstitutionally appointed.
The broader application of Arthrex could call into question the appointments of administrative law judges across many federal agencies. The purpose of this article is to review the appointment process, oversight, and responsibilities of other IP tribunals—including the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) and the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC)—and consider the implications of Arthrex, if any, on their constitutionality.
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB), International Trade Commission (ITC), Arthrex v. Smith & Nephew , Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS), administrative patent judge (APJ)
Lecture
Patent Protection for Software-Related Inventions in Europe and the USA Training Course
June 5, 2024
Hybrid
Webinar
May 9, 2024
Webinar
Workshop
Life Sciences Workshop: Updates and Key Trends in Pharmaceutical and Biotechnology IP Law
May 2, 2024
Cambridge
Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.
We use cookies on this website to provide you with the best user experience. By accepting cookies, you agree to our use of cookies. Please note that if you opt not to accept or if you disable cookies, the “Your Finnegan” feature on this website will be disabled as well. For more information on how we use cookies, please see our Privacy Policy.
Finnegan is thrilled to announce the launch of our new blog, Ad Law Buzz, devoted solely to breaking news, developments, trends, and analysis in advertising law.