throbber
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PA TENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`GENERAL ORDER LIFTING
`GENERAL ORDER IN CASES INVOLVING
`REQUESTS FOR REHEARING UNDER
`ARTHREX, INC V SMITH & NEPHEW, INC,
`941 F.3D 1320 (FED. CIR. 2019)
`
`GENERAL ORDER
`
`Before SCOTT R. BOALICK, Chief Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`BOALICK, Chief Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`As explained in the General Order in Cases Involving Requests for
`
`Rehearing Under Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., 941 F.3d 1320 (Fed.
`
`Cir. 2019) ("General Order in Rehearing Cases"), the United States Court of
`
`Appeals for the Federal Circuit ("Federal Circuit") issued numerous Orders
`
`instructing the Patent Trial and Appeal Board ("Board") to conduct
`
`proceedings on remand consistent with the Federal Circuit's Arthrex
`
`decision. As also explained in the General Order in Rehearing Cases, the
`
`Board received several timely requests for rehearing of Board decisions
`
`citing the Federal Circuit's Arthrex decision. To avoid burdening the Office
`
`and the parties until all appellate rights had been exhausted, the General
`
`Order in Rehearing Cases was issued, holding all cases involving such
`
`requests for rehearing in administrative abeyance until the Supreme Court of
`
`

`

`General Order Regarding Arthrex-Related Requests for Rehearing
`
`the United States ("Supreme Court") acted on a petition for certiorari or the
`
`time for filing such petitions expired.
`
`On June 21, 2021, the Supreme Court vacated the Federal Circuit's
`
`judgment in Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc. and remanded to the
`
`Acting Director for him to decide whether to rehear the Board's final written
`
`decision. United States v. Arthrex, Inc., 141 S. Ct. 1970, 1987-88 (2021).
`
`The Supreme Court subsequently granted petitions for certiorari in other
`
`cases in which the Federal Circuit remanded to the Board for proceedings
`
`consistent with the Federal Circuit's Arthrex decision, vacated the Federal
`
`Circuit's judgment in those cases, and remanded them for further
`
`consideration in light of United States v. Arthrex, Inc. See lancu v. Luoma,
`
`No. 20-74 (June 28, 2021); lancu v. Fall Line Patents, LLC, No. 20-853
`
`(June 28, 2021); Hirshfeldv. Implicit, LLC, No. 20-1631 (Oct. 18, 2021).
`
`Now that the Supreme Court has acted on petitions for certiorari in
`
`cases that were previously remanded to the Board under the Federal
`
`Circuit's Arthrex decision, the General Order in Rehearing Cases is lifted.
`
`Those cases are no longer in administrative abeyance.
`
`ORDER
`
`It is therefore ORDERED that the General Order in Rehearing Cases
`
`has been lifted and the subject cases are no longer in administrative
`
`abeyance.
`
`AL q(jl,____
`
`Scott R. Boalick
`Chief Administrative Patent Judge
`
`2
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket