In re Boloro Global Ltd.

 
APPEAL NO.
19-2349
OP. BELOW
OPINION
TBD
SUBJECT
Patent
AUTHOR
TBD

Issue(s) Presented

1. “Whether Arthrex should be extended to ex parte examination cases.” 2. “Whether the Director’s purported ability to refuse to issue a patent if the Patent Trial and Appeal Board approves an application amounts to sufficient control or review over the Board’s exercise of authority to render them inferior officers?” 3. “Whether, under the Supreme Court’s reasoning in Freytag v. Commissioner, 501 U.S. 868, 882 (1991) that if the special trial judge in question was ‘an inferior officer for purposes of’ some responsibilities, then ‘he is an inferior officer within the meaning of the Appointments Clause and he must be properly appointed,’ can an administrative patent judge’s appointment be unconstitutional with regard to inter partes reviews as was determined in Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., 941 F.3d 1320 (Fed. Cir. 2019) and yet constitutional for reviewing initial examination?”

Posts About this Case