[20210315]LSB10580_最高法院将考虑专利法官的任命是否符合宪法.pdf

CRS Legal Sidebar Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress Legal SidebarLegal Sidebari i Supreme Court to Consider Whether Patent Judges Appointments Are Constitutional March 15, 2021 In 2011, Congress enacted a major patent reform bill, the LeahySmith America Invents Act (AIA). The AIA, among other things, created adversarial proceedingsinter partes review (IPR) and post-grant review (PGR)to review the validity of issued patents and cancel those that should not have issued. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Offices (PTOs) Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), composed of hundreds of administrative patent judges (APJs), oversees such proceedings. The Secretary of Commerce (the Secretary), in consultation with the Director of the PTO (the Director), appoints APJs to the PTAB. A panel of three APJs oversees each IPR or PGR and rules on the validity of the patent under review. In United States v. Arthrex, Inc., the Supreme Court is poised to address whether APJs exercise enough power with sufficient independence such that the U.S. Constitutions Appointments Clause requires that they be appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate. Depending on how the Suprem