Two more judges from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit have weighed in with criticisms of October’s blockbuster appointments clause decision Arthrex v. Smith & Nephew, even as the full court weighs whether to reconsider the case en banc.

Judges Todd Hughes and Evan Wallach issued a concurring opinion Friday saying they don’t agree that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s 275 administrative patent judges are principal officers who are subject to confirmation by the U.S. Senate. Given the USPTO director’s “significant control” over their activities, “APJs are inferior officers already properly appointed by the Secretary of Commerce,” Hughes wrote in Polaris Innovations v. Kingston Technology.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]