About this event
This session will analyze the Supreme Court’s decision in US v. Arthrex Inc. and Minerva Surgical Inc. v. Hologic Inc. In US v. Arthrex, the Court issued a fractured decision, holding: (1) in a 5-4 decision, that the unreviewable authority of administrative patent judges in the Patent Trial and Appeal Board violated the Appointments Clause; and (2) in a 7-2 decision, that, to fix the violation, the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has the discretion to review the decisions of the administrative patent judges. In Minerva Surgical Inc. v. Hologic Inc., the Court held that the well-grounded patent law doctrine of assignor estoppel applies only when the assignor’s claim of invalidity contradicts explicit or implicit representations the assignor made in assigning the patent. The speakers will dissect these decisions and offer their critiques. The panel will also preview cert petitions to watch in patent cases. N.B. The Zoom link to attend will be emailed the day before the conference.
Committed speakers include:
US v. Arthrex
Prof. Melissa Wasserman, The Univ. of Texas at Austin School of Law
Prof. Harold Krent, Chicago-Kent College of Law
Anthony Cho, Carlson, Gaskey & Olds P.C.
Minerva Surgical Inc. v. Hologic Inc.
Prof. Mark Lemley, Stanford Law School
Caroline Wong, Sidley Austin LLP
Luke McCloud, Williams & Connolly LLP