Deep Dive Episode 167 – Courthouse Steps Oral Argument: United States v. Arthrex Inc.
Regulatory Transparency Project's Fourth Branch Podcast
|Topics:||Administrative Law & Regulation • Intellectual Property • Regulatory Transparency Project|
|Sponsors:||Federalism & Separation of Powers Practice Group, Intellectual Property Practice Group, Regulatory Transparency Project|
Listen & Download
The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in United States v. Arthrex Inc. on March 1, 2021. This case is an important one for the office of patent judges; at issue is whether, for purposes of the Appointments Clause, administrative patent judges of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office are "principal officers," which require presidential appointment and Senate confirmation, or "inferior officers," which do not. Also at issue is whether, if they are principal officers, the lower court properly cured any Appointments Clause defects in the current statutory scheme.
Gregory Dolin and Dmitry Karshtedt joined us to review oral arguments, discuss the case, and offer their divergent views on the merits in a discussion moderated by Kristen Osenga.
- Gregory Dolin, Associate Professor of Law, University of Baltimore School of Law
- Dmitry Karshtedt, Associate Professor of Law, George Washington Law School
- [Moderator] Kristen Osenga, Austin E. Owen Research Scholar & Professor of Law, University of Richmond School of Law
Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.