More on Arthrex in CAFC order of May 13, 2020 in Virnetx v. Cisco

In the matter, Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark
Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. 95/001,679, the CAFC
further expounded on Arthrex.

The order given on 13 May 2020 is for further explanation:


The Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office and Cisco Systems, Inc. have petitioned for rehearing to argue that we erred in extending Arthrex, Inc.
v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., 941 F.3d 1320 (Fed. Cir. 2019)
beyond the context of inter partes reviews to this appeal
from a decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board in an
inter partes reexamination. Specifically, they assert that
administrative patent judges (“APJs”) should be deemed
constitutionally appointed officers at least when it comes
to their duties reviewing appeals of inter partes reexaminations. We issue this order for the purpose of more fully
explaining our rationale for rejecting this argument.