Duke Law | Constitutional Principals: Administrative Adjudication and Arthrex

February 12, 2021

The Supreme Court will hear argument in United States v. Arthrex, Inc. on March 1, 2021. The issue before the Court is the application of the Appointments Clause to judges of the Patent Trial and Appeals Board, a tribunal established by Congress in 2012 within the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. The decision below by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that administrative patent judges were principal officers under the Constitution. The Arthrex case focuses on the proper construction of the Appointments Clause and, more broadly, the proper role of administrative adjudication. Distinguished commentators on this program included a Federal Circuit judge and renowned academics whose scholarship has focused on the key patent, administrative, and constitutional issues.

Appearing in Panel I: Arti Rai (Duke Law), moderator ; the Honorable Timothy Dyk (United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit), Prof. John Duffy (UVA Law), and Melissa Wasserman (University of Texas Law), panelists.

Appearing in Panel II: Stuart Benjamin (Duke Law), moderator ; Michael Asimow (Santa Clara Law), Jennifer Mascott (Antonin Scalia Law School), Nina Mendelson, (University of Michigan Law), and Christopher Walker (Ohio State Moritz College of Law).

Panel II titled: Administrative & Constitutional Law starts at 44:00.

Sponsored by The Center for Innovation Policy at Duke Law and the Duke Law Program in Public Law.

Originally recorded February 12, 2021.