Partner George E. Quillin was quoted in the IP Watchdog article, “” on the decision in closely-watched U.S. Supreme Court patent case, United States / Smith & Nephew v. Arthrex.Â
˛ĎłÜľ±±ô±ôľ±˛ÔĚýłŮ´Ç±ô»ĺ IP Watchdog: “Remarkably, the Chief Justice steered a course least upsetting to the Board’s workload. That is, having found a constitutional defect, the remedy could have been what Arthrex urged – reverse the Federal Circuit’s severance remedy and allow Congress to choose a remedy. That would have cast a pall over hundreds of recently decided and existing inter partes reviews (IPRs). Or the remedy could have been what the government urged – affirm the Federal Circuit’s severance remedy. That would have meant that hundreds of previously decided and timely challenged IPRs would have to be reheard by a fresh panel of administrative patent judges. Instead, the Court’s remedy requires only that the Director have the discretion to decide whether or not he will rehear any of the IPRs. The cynic can imagine a busy bureaucrat’s easy choice on such a decision.”
