No. 19-1434
United States v. Arthrex, Inc., et al.
Tags: administrative-patent-judges appointments-clause constitutional-law inferior-officer inferior-officers patent patent-and-trademark-office principal-officer principal-officers standing uspto
Latest Conference:
2020-10-09
(distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (from Petition)
1. Whether, for purposes of the Appointments Clause, U.S. Const. Art. II, § 2, Cl. 2, administrative patent judges of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office are principal officers who must be appointed by the President with the Senate's advice and consent, or "inferior Officers" whose appointment Congress has permissibly vested in a department head.
2. Whether the court of appeals erred by adjudicating an Appointments Clause challenge brought by a litigant that had not presented the challenge to the agency.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether administrative patent judges are principal officers under the Appointments Clause
Docket Entries
2021-07-23
JUDGMENT ISSUED.
2021-02-09
The record from the U.S.C.A. Federal Circuit is electronic and located on Pacer.
2021-01-25
Record requested from the U.S.C.A. for the Federal Circuit.
2021-01-14
CIRCULATED
2020-12-02
Brief amicus curiae of Jason V. Morgan filed (in 19-1434).
2020-11-03
Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, United States
2020-10-29
Blanket Consent filed by Respondent, Arthrex, Inc.
2020-10-28
Blanket Consent filed by Respondent, Smith & Nephew, Inc., et al.
2020-10-05
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/9/2020.
2020-08-12
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2020.
2020-07-29
Brief amicus curiae of Askeladden L.L.C. filed.
2020-06-25
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due July 29, 2020)
Attorneys
39 AGGRIEVED INVENTORS
Acushnet Company and Roger Cleveland Golf Inc.
Peter J. Brann — Brann & Isaacson, Amicus
Administrative, Constitutional & Intellectual Property Law Professors
Alan B. Morrison — George Washington Law School, Amicus
American Intellectual Property Law Association
Sophie Feifei Wang — Choate Hall & Stewart LLP, Amicus
Americans for Prosperity Foundation and TechFreedom
Apple Inc.
Arthrex, Inc.
Jeffrey Alan Lamken — MoloLamken LLP, Respondent
Askeladden L.L.C.
Gregory Hayes Lantier — Wilmer Cutler Pickering, Amicus
Association for Accessible Medicines
Matthew S. Hellman — Jenner & Block LLP, Amicus
B.E. Technology, LLC
Cato Institute and Prof. Gregory Dolin
Ilya Shapiro — Cato Institute, Amicus
Coalition Against Patent Abuse
Charles Duan — Amicus
Computer & Communications Industry Association; U.S. Manufacturers Association for Development and Enterprise
Cross-Industry Groups
Stephen I. Vladeck — Amicus
eComp Consultants
Engine Advocacy and Electronic Frontier Foundation
Fair Inventing Fund
Mathew B. Tully — Tully Rinckey PLLC, Amicus
High Tech Inventors Alliance
Andrew John Pincus — Mayer Brown LLP, Amicus
Intel Corp.
Jason V. Morgan
Jason V. Morgan — Amicus
Jeremy C. Doerre
Jeremy Cooper Doerre — Tillman Wright, PLLC, Amicus
Joshua J. Malone
Timothy J. Haller — Haller Law PLLC, Amicus
New Civil Liberties Alliance
Richard A. Samp — New Civil Liberties Alliance, Amicus
Niskanen Center
David Gabriel Bookbinder — Niskanen Center, Amicus
Pacific Legal Foundation
Oliver James Dunford — Pacific Legal Foundation, Amicus
Polaris Innovations Limited
Matthew D. Powers — Tensegrity Law Group LLP, Respondent
Professor Andrew Michaels
Professor John Harrison
John Harrison — Amicus
Smith & Nephew, Inc., et al.
Mark Andrew Perry — Gibson Dunn & Crutcher, LLP, Respondent
The Intellectual Property Law Association of Chicago
John R Linzer — Quarles & Brady, LLP, Amicus
The New York Intellectual Property Law Association
Melvin C. Garner — Leason Ellis LL P, Amicus
TiVo Corporation
U.S. Lumber Coalition
Kevin K. Russell — Goldstein and Russell, P.C., Amicus
Unified Patents, LLC
William G. Jenks — Jenks IP Law, Amicus
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Acting Solicitor General, Petitioner
US Inventor, Inc.