Share:
Washington, D.C., Dec. 31, 2020 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) The New Civil Liberties Alliance, a nonpartisan, nonprofit civil rights group, filed an
amicus curiae brief in the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of
United States v. Arthrex, Inc., et al. At issue in the consolidated set of cases is whether administrative patent judges (APJs) can be appointed by the U.S. Secretary of Commerce or whether the Constitution requires the President to appoint these judges and the Senate to confirm them.
NCLA argues (with Arthrex) that APJs are principal officers of the United States. Hence, according to the Constitution s Appointments Clause, they must be appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate. The Secretary of Commerce, as the head of a department, could appoint APJs if they were deemed inferior officers. But under the America Invents Act of 2011, APJ decisions cannot be reviewed by a superior in the Executive Branch only by other APJs. This fact m
Progress in the
Arthrex case before the Supreme Court continues as Arthrex submitted its initial merits brief on December 23rd. We have previously discussed the decision by the Federal Circuit, the Supreme Court’s grant of certiorari, the questions presented (docketed as 19-1434), initial briefs from Smith & Nephew and the United States, and some of the arguments made in the amicus briefs filed in support of their positions .
In this post, we review Arthrex’s merits brief, which takes the position that the Federal Circuit was correct in finding administrative patent judges (APJs) are principal officers, but the Federal Circuit’s remedy of severing APJs’ tenure protections was incorrect. Instead, Arthrex advocates a position that severance is inappropriate and Congress must resolve the constitutional issues surrounding APJs.
The Year in Patents: Ten Developments We ll Remember From 2020 ipwatchdog.com - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from ipwatchdog.com Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
Wednesday, December 30, 2020
While most Americans are likely aware that President Donald Trump signed a pandemic relief and government spending bill into law on Dec. 27, 2020 (the “Omnibus Bill”),
[i] it is important for those who have intellectual property assets to understand that tucked away into this nearly 5,600-page legislation are laws impacting copyrights, trademarks, and patents. Despite receiving only limited scrutiny before becoming law, the copyright and trademark laws in particular could have a profound impact on protection and enforcement of these assets.
Copyrights
The Omnibus Bill impacts copyright law in the following general ways: It establishes a copyright small-claims court within the U.S. Copyright Office to adjudicate disputes valued at $30,000 or fewer in damages, and it creates felony criminal penalties for unauthorized commercial streaming.
Statement by the President | The White House whitehouse.gov - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from whitehouse.gov Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.