United States v. Arthrex, Inc.

United States v. Arthrex, Inc.
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued March 1, 2021 Decided June 21, 2021
Full case name	United States v. Arthrex, Inc., et al.; Smith & Nephew, Inc., et al. v. Arthrex, Inc., et al.; Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., et al.
Docket nos.	19-1434 19-1452 19-1458
Citations	594 U.S. ___ (more)
Holding
The unreviewable authority of Administrative Patent Judges is incompatible with their status as inferior officers. The Director of the Patent and Trademark Office, as their principal officer, may review such decisions and, upon review, may confirm or revise the decisions.
Court membership
Chief Justice John Roberts Associate Justices Clarence Thomas · Stephen Breyer Samuel Alito · Sonia Sotomayor Elena Kagan · Neil Gorsuch Brett Kavanaugh · Amy Coney Barrett
Case opinions
Majority	Roberts (Parts I and II), joined by Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Barrett
Plurality	Roberts (Part III), joined by Alito, Kavanaugh, Barrett
Concur/dissent	Gorsuch
Concur/dissent	Breyer, joined by Sotomayor, Kagan
Dissent	Thomas, joined by Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan (Parts I and II)

United States v. Arthrex, Inc., 594 U.S. ___ (2021), was a United States Supreme Court case related to the Appointments Clause of the United States Constitution as it related to patent judges on the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). In a complex decision, the Court ruled that these judges were considered "primary officers" under the Appointments Clause, normally subject to appointment through the US President and the US Senate, but to remedy the matter, the Court ruled that the constitutional issue is resolved by allowing the PTAB decisions to be subject to review by the appropriately-appointed Director of the Patent Office.