1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.3d
  4. 935 F.3d
  5. 935 F.3d 1319 (2019)
 

ARTHREX, INC. v. SMITH & NEPHEW, INC.

2018-1584.

935 F.3d 1319 (2019)

ARTHREX, INC., Appellant v. SMITH & NEPHEW, INC., Arthrocare Corp., Appellees United States, Intervenor.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

Decided: August 21, 2019.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Anthony P. Cho , Carlson, Gaskey & Olds, PC, Birmingham, MI, argued for appellant. Also represented by David J. Gaskey , Jessica E. Zilberberg .

Nathan R. Speed , Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, PC, Boston, MA, argued for appellees. Also represented by Richard Giunta ; Michael N. Rader , New York, NY.

Dennis Fan , Appellate Staff, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, argued for intervenor. Also represented by Scott R. McIntosh , Joseph H. Hunt , Katherine Twomey Allen ; Thomas W. Krause , Joseph Matal , Farheena Yasmeen Rasheed , Office of the Solicitor, United States Patent and Trademark Office, Alexandria, VA.

Before Dyk, Chen, and Stoll, Circuit Judges.

In an inter partes review, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board ruled claims 10 and 11 of Arthrex, Inc.'s U.S. Patent No. 8,821,541 invalid. In doing so, the Board employed different language than Smith & Nephew, Inc.'s petition to explain why a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases