UNITED STATES, Petitioner
v.
ARTHREX, INC., et al.;
Smith & Nephew, Inc., et al., Petitioners
v.
Arthrex, Inc., et al.;
Arthrex, Inc., Petitioner
v.
Smith & Nephew, Inc., et al.
Supreme Court of United States.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
Argued March 1, 2021.
Decided June 21, 2021.
Attorney(s) appearing for the Case
Malcolm L. Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General, Washington, DC, for Petitioner United States.
Mark A. Perry, Washington, D.C., for Smith & Nephew, Inc., et al.
Jeffrey A. Lamken, New York, NY, for Arthrex, Inc.
Anthony P. Cho, David J. Gaskey, Jessica E. Fleetham, David L. Atallah, Carlson, Gaskey & Olds, P.C., Birmingham, MI, Charles W. Saber, Salvatore P. Tamburo, Blank Rome LLP, Washington, D.C., John W. Schmieding, Trevor Arnold, Arthrex, Inc., Naples, FL, Jeffrey A. Lamken, Robert K. Kry, James A. Barta, MoloLamken LLP, Washington, D.C., Jordan A. Rice, MoloLamken LLP, Chicago, IL, Mark A. Perry, Counsel of Record, Kellam M. Conover, Brian A. Richman, Max E. Schulman, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, Washington, D.C., Jessica A. Hudak, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, Irvine, CA, Charles T. Steenburg, Nathan R. Speed, Richard F. Giunta, Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C., Boston, MA, Mark J. Gorman, Smith & Nephew, Inc., Cordova, TN, for Respondents.
Elizabeth B. Prelogar, Jeffrey B. Wall, Acting Solicitors General Counsel of Record, Malcolm L. Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General, Michael D. Granston, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Jonathan Y. Ellis, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Scott R. Mcintosh, Melissa N. Patterson, Courtney L. Dixon, Attorneys, Jeffrey Bossert Clark, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Department of Justice, Sopan Joshi, Senior Counsel to the Assistant Attorney General, Washington, D.C., David L. Berdan, General Counsel, Thomas W. Krause, Solicitor, Farheena Y. Rasheed, Deputy Solicitor, Molly R. Silfen, Daniel Kazhdan, Associate Solicitors United States Patent and Trademark Office, Alexandria, Va., for Petitioner.
Chief JusticeROBERTS delivered the opinion of the Court with respect to Parts I and II.
The validity of a patent previously issued by the Patent and Trademark Office can be challenged before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, an executive tribunal within the PTO. The Board, composed largely of Administrative...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting Sign on now to see your case. Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
Updated daily.
Uncompromising quality.
Complete, Accurate, Current.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full
text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the
full text of the citing case.
