No. 19-1459
Polaris Innovations Limited v. Kingston Technology Company, Inc., et al.
Amici (2)Relisted (3)
Tags: 35-usc-311 administrative-patent-judges appointments-clause civil-service-protections congressional-intent constitutional-remedy ipr-statute patent-law severance statutory-interpretation tenure-protections
Key Terms:
AdministrativeLaw Securities Patent Copyright
AdministrativeLaw Securities Patent Copyright
Latest Conference:
2021-06-24
(distributed 3 times)
Question Presented (from Petition)
1. Whether severance of the tenure protections for Administrative Patent Judges ("APJs") was unavailable to the Arthrex court to remedy the violation of the Appointments Clause by the IPR statute, 35 U.S.C. § 311 et seq, because Congress would have maintained such protection for APJs;
2. Whether the Arthrex decision's removal of APJ tenure protections is insufficient to cure the violation of the Appointments Clause by the IPR statute.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether severance of the tenure protections for Administrative Patent Judges ('APJs) was unavailable to the Arthrex court to remedy the violation of the Appointments Clause
Docket Entries
2021-07-30
JUDGMENT ISSUED.
2021-06-28
Petition GRANTED. Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED for further consideration in light of <i>United States</i> v. <i>Arthrex, Inc.</i>, 594 U. S. ___ (2021).
2021-06-21
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/24/2021.
2020-10-05
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/9/2020.
2020-08-12
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2020.
2020-08-05
Brief amicus curiae of TiVo Corporation filed.
2020-07-29
Brief amicus curiae of The New York Intellectual Property Law Association filed.
2020-06-30
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due August 5, 2020)
Attorneys
Polaris Innovations Limited
Matthew D. Powers — Tensegrity Law Group LLP, Petitioner
The New York Intellectual Property Law Association
Melvin C. Garner — Leason Ellis LL P, Amicus
TiVo Corporation
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent