Arthrex Inc. v. Smith & Nephew Inc.
Consolidated with:
Docket No. | Op. Below | Argument | Opinion | Vote | Author | Term |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
19-1458 | Fed. Cir. | Mar 1, 2021 | Jun 21, 2021 | 5-4 | Roberts | OT 2020 |
Holding: The unreviewable authority wielded by Administrative Patent Judges during inter partes review is incompatible with their appointment by the Secretary of Commerce to an inferior office.
Judgment: Vacated and remanded, 5-4, in an opinion by Chief Justice Roberts on June 21, 2021. Justices Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett joined Parts I and II of the opinion, and Justices Alito, Kavanaugh and Barrett joined Part III of the opinion. Justice Gorsuch filed an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part. Justice Breyer filed an opinion concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part, in which Justices Sotomayor and Kagan joined. Justice Thomas filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Breyer, Sotomayor and Kagan joined as to Parts I and II.
SCOTUSblog Coverage
- Justices craft their own remedy for violation of Constitutions appointments clause (George Quillin and Jeanne Gills, June 24, 2021)
- Justices scale back unreviewable authority of administrative patent judges (George Quillin and Jeanne Gills, June 21, 2021)
- Justices appear conflicted about status of administrative patent judges (George Quillin and Jeanne Gills, March 3, 2021)
- Justices to consider appointments clause challenge to administrative patent judges (George Quillin and Jeanne Gills, February 26, 2021)
- February argument calendar includes immigration, voting-rights cases (Amy Howe, December 31, 2020)
- Supreme Court will consider constitutional status of administrative patent judges (Amy Howe, October 14, 2020)
- Relist Watch: Worst Monday in October (John Elwood, October 7, 2020)
- Petitions of the week: Abortion, alcohol, appointments and more (Andrew Hamm, July 30, 2020)
Date | Proceedings and Orders |
---|---|
06/30/2020 | Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due August 5, 2020) |
07/20/2020 | Blanket Consent filed by Respondents, Smith & Nephew, Inc., et al. VIDED |
07/20/2020 | Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, Arthrex, Inc. VIDED |
07/20/2020 | Blanket Consent filed by Respondent, United States VIDED |
07/22/2020 | Memorandum of respondent United States filed. VIDED. |
07/23/2020 | Brief of respondents Smith & Nephew, Inc., et al. filed. VIDED. |
08/04/2020 | Brief amicus curiae of US Inventor, Inc. filed. |
08/05/2020 | Brief amicus curiae of TiVo Corporation filed. |
08/11/2020 | Reply of petitioner Arthrex, Inc. filed. (Distributed) |
08/12/2020 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2020. |
10/05/2020 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/9/2020. |
10/13/2020 | Petition GRANTED, the petition for a writ of certiorari in No. 19-1434 is granted as to Federal Circuit case No. 2018-2140, and the petition for a writ of certiorari in No. 19-1452 is granted, all limited to Questions 1 and 2 as set forth in the July 22, 2020 Memorandum for the United States. The cases are consolidated, and a total of one hour is allotted for oral argument. VIDED. |
10/13/2020 | Because the Court has consolidated these cases for briefing and oral argument, future filings and activity in the cases will now be reflected on the docket of No. 19-1434. Subsequent filings in these cases must therefore be submitted through the electronic filing system in No. 19-1434. Each document submitted in connection with one or more of these cases must include on its cover the case number and caption for each case in which the filing is intended to be submitted. Where a filing is submitted in fewer than all of the cases, the docket entry will reflect the case number(s) in which the filing is submitted; a document filed in all of the consolidated cases will be noted as “VIDED.” |
12/31/2020 | SET FOR ARGUMENT on Monday, March 1, 2021. VIDED. |
01/14/2021 | CIRCULATED |
01/25/2021 | Record requested from the U.S.C.A. for the Federal Circuit. |
03/01/2021 | Argued. For United States: Malcolm L. Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. For Smith & Nephew, Inc., et al.: Mark A. Perry, Washington, D. C. For Arthrex, Inc.: Jeffrey A. Lamken, Washington, D. C. VIDED. |
06/21/2021 | Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED. Roberts, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court with respect to Parts I and II, in which Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett, JJ., joined, and an opinion with respect to Part III, in which Alito, Kavanaugh, and Barrett, JJ., joined. Gorsuch, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part. Breyer, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part, in which Sotomayor and Kagan, JJ., joined. Thomas, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan, JJ., joined as to Parts I and II. VIDED. |
07/23/2021 | JUDGMENT ISSUED. |