Case: 18-1768 Document: 106 Page: 1 Filed: 01/31/2020
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals
for the Federal Circuit
______________________
POLARIS INNOVATIONS LIMITED,
Appellant
v.
KINGSTON TECHNOLOGY COMPANY, INC.,
Appellee
UNITED STATES,
Intervenor
______________________
2018-1768
______________________
Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark
Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. IPR2016-
01621.
______________________
Decided: January 31, 2020
______________________
MATTHEW D. POWERS, Tensegrity Law Group LLP,
Redwood Shores, CA, argued for appellant. Also repre-
sented by JENNIFER ROBINSON; AZRA HADZIMEHMEDOVIC,
AARON MATTHEW NATHAN, SAMANTHA A. JAMESON,
McLean, VA; NATHAN NOBU LOWENSTEIN, KENNETH J.
WEATHERWAX, Lowenstein & Weatherwax LLP, Los Ange-
les, CA.
Case: 18-1768 Document: 106 Page: 2 Filed: 01/31/2020
2 POLARIS INNOVATIONS LIMITED v. KINGSTON TECHNOLOGY
CO. INC.
MICHAEL JOHN BALLANCO, Fish & Richardson PC,
Washington, DC, argued for appellee. Also represented by
DAVID M. HOFFMAN, Austin, TX.
MELISSA N. PATTERSON, Appellate Staff, Civil Division,
United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, ar-
gued for intervenor. Also represented by COURTNEY DIXON,
DENNIS FAN, SCOTT R. MCINTOSH, JOSEPH H. HUNT;
THOMAS W. KRAUSE, JOSEPH MATAL, FARHEENA YASMEEN
RASHEED, Office of the Solicitor, United States Patent and
Trademark Office, Alexandria, VA.
______________________
Before REYNA, WALLACH, and HUGHES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
In its opening brief, Polaris Innovations Limited ar-
gues that the final written decision at issue in this appeal
exceeds the scope of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s
authority and violates the Constitution’s Appointments
Clause. See Appellant’s Br. 52 (citing U.S. Const. art. II,
§ 2, cl. 2). This court recently decided this issue in Arthrex,
Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., 941 F.3d 1320 (Fed. Cir.
2019). Accordingly, the Board’s decision in No. IPR2016-
01621 is vacated, and the case is remanded to the Board for
proceedings consistent with this court’s decision in Arthrex.
VACATED AND REMANDED
COSTS
No costs.