Update on Arthrex episode artwork

EPISODE · Jan 1, 2021

Update on Arthrex

from Finnegan Intellectual Property Law Podcasts · host Timothy P. McAnulty, Emily R. Gabranski

We recently discussed the Federal Circuit’s decision in Arthrex, Inc. v Smith & Nephew, Inc., and the constitutional question concerning the appointment of the administrative patent judges (APJs) who hear all Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) trials. The original panel decided Arthrex in November 2019 and found the judges to be improperly appointed, struck a portion of the America Invents Act (AIA) statutory framework to correct the issue, and remanded the case to the PTAB for rehearing (with a now properly appointed panel of APJs). During the appeal, the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) intervened in support of the propriety of the APJs both before the remedy prescribed in Arthex and afterward. All parties sought en banc review. And in March 2020, the Federal Circuit denied those requests. Read the full article here.

Episode metadata supplied by the publisher feed · Published Jan 1, 2021

Embed this episode

NOW PLAYING

Update on Arthrex

0:00 0:00

No transcript for this episode yet

We transcribe on demand. Request one and we'll notify you when it's ready — usually under 10 minutes.

No similar episodes found.

No similar podcasts found.

Frequently Asked Questions

When was this Finnegan Intellectual Property Law Podcasts episode published?

This episode was published on January 1, 2021.

Can I download this Finnegan Intellectual Property Law Podcasts episode?

Yes. Use the download control on the episode player to save the publisher-provided media file.
URL copied to clipboard!