PTAB Details Interim Procedure for Requesting Arthrex Director Review
By Matt Johnson - On June 29th, the PTO issued an initial protocol for requesting Director review of a PTAB Final Written Decision according to the Supreme Court’s Arthrex decision. This Arthrex protocol is similar to the current procedure for requesting rehearing by...
If IPR’s Not Your Bag, Consider Ex Parte Reexamination
By John Evans and Callan Foran* These days, we generally think about inter partes review as a first option to challenge patentability. Rightly so. But don’t forget about ex parte reexamination (“XPR”). Even in the IPR era, patent challengers are still successfully...
Arthrex: Unreviewable APJ Authority Incompatible with Appointments Clause
By Greg Castanias, Dave Cochran, Steph Mishaga, and Alex Chung - In United States v. Arthrex Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court agreed with the Federal Circuit that the pre-Arthrex Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) regime of Administrative Patent Judge decisions being...
BREAKING: Supreme Court Arthrex Decided
On June 21, 2021, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Arthex stating: Today, we reaffirm and apply the rule from Edmond that the exercise of executive power by inferior officers must at some level be subject to the direction and supervision of an officer...
PTAB Declines to Exercise Discretion Post-Markman
By Hannah Mehrle and Matt Johnson - Petitioner (Apple, Inc.) filed a petition to institute inter partes on a patent owned by Koss Corporation (Patent Owner). The PTAB considered six factors from Fintiv to assess whether to exercise authority to deny institution under...